Yeah we all know he can run but can he throw? Seems to be struggling with that overall.

williar

12-12-2011, 07:08 PM

Not trying to be a Cam Newton apologist here, nor a (loser) stat geek, but If I recall correctly Cam has given his team considerable leads in most of their games. I mean, do the panthers have a defense on the payroll or what? Aaron Rogers couldn't work any magic with that non existence of a defense...

Dee Dub

12-12-2011, 08:45 PM

A 59.7% completion percentage, 16 picks, and a 81.1 QB rating has nothing to do with the Panthers defense.

Just sayin' :P

steelz09

12-12-2011, 08:49 PM

He's no Tim Tebow! :stirpot

snarky

12-12-2011, 09:01 PM

Strangely, those numbers are pretty close to Ben's were the last time we won the SB.

Dee Dub

12-12-2011, 09:06 PM

Strangely, those numbers are pretty close to Ben's were the last time we won the SB.

...but no where close to Ben's rookie year. :wink:

williar

12-12-2011, 09:18 PM

A 59.7% completion percentage, 16 picks, and a 81.1 QB rating has nothing to do with the Panthers defense.

Just sayin' :P

It's a TEAM game... Where would Ben be without his defense.

Just sayin' :moon

SteelAbility

12-12-2011, 10:38 PM

A 59.7% completion percentage, 16 picks, and a 81.1 QB rating has nothing to do with the Panthers defense.

Yeah we all know he can run but can he throw? Seems to be struggling with that overall.

Have you watched him this year? The guy has it all...

They have led in 12 of 13 games this season at the half. They lost their 2 best players on D and have to score 30+ to win a game.

A rookie QB, rookie HC, new OC and DC on a team that was 2-14 last year. Not exactly sure why everyone expected a playoff run this year.

I know all this because I live in Charlotte is trust me... it's much better than last year. The games are exciting and aren't over by the end of the 1st quarter. I'm giddy the guy is a Panther since I have to watch them most Sundays if I stay home.

williar

12-13-2011, 10:26 AM

Cam is going to be ROY. Panthers wouldn't trade him for any QB in the league not name Aaron Rogers. If Cam re entered himself in this upcoming draft with all these QB's he'd still be the first player taken.

I'm still trying to figure what "tweedle-dee-dumb's" point is.............

feltdizz

12-13-2011, 11:02 AM

A 59.7% completion percentage, 16 picks, and a 81.1 QB rating has nothing to do with the Panthers defense.

Just sayin' :P

When your D is giving up 30+ a game it forces the OC to be more aggressive. It has everything to do with the D if you watched their games.

Cam is definitely responsible for some of those picks but if the coaches felt as though they could ball control and win 10 to 7 like Tebow they would probably do it.

Also remember the offense was blamed a ton for blowing 4th quarter leads in 2009 so yes, the D is responsible for all of Cam's woes.

Dee Dub

12-13-2011, 12:51 PM

A 59.7% completion percentage, 16 picks, and a 81.1 QB rating has nothing to do with the Panthers defense.

Just sayin' :P

And neither do his 13 rushing TDs, 45 rushing YPG and 4.9 YPC

Just sayin' ... :P

He's a QB in an era that relies heavily on throwing the football. What he does a runner, really is irrelevant. How many games has that won him? How many championships has that won Michael Vick? Or Randall Cunningham? Or Kordell Stewart?

He could run for 1,500 yards. Big deal. As a passer this year, his numbers are below average. And they are on a steady decline.

Yeah we all know he can run but can he throw? Seems to be struggling with that overall.

Have you watched him this year? The guy has it all...

They have led in 12 of 13 games this season at the half. They lost their 2 best players on D and have to score 30+ to win a game.

A rookie QB, rookie HC, new OC and DC on a team that was 2-14 last year. Not exactly sure why everyone expected a playoff run this year.

I know all this because I live in Charlotte is trust me... it's much better than last year. The games are exciting and aren't over by the end of the 1st quarter. I'm giddy the guy is a Panther since I have to watch them most Sundays if I stay home.

Could careless. Look at his throwing numbers. And look what has happened with him the past 4 out of 5 games. Notice a trend? 4 TD's 7 INT's, 57.5, 57.9, 57.1, and 48.7 completion percentage.

And no...he doenst have it all. He lacks the biggest and most important thing a QB in this era needs. The ability to make good sound decisions.

And this time next year when Carolina is still losing it will be interesting to see how he handles adversary.

I don't see how you can say his running numbers are irrelevant. The object of the game is to advance that ball and if he can pull it down and run with it, then good for him. Just like Ben can extend plays with his legs to get positive yards with a pass, if Newton can extend a play with his legs and get positive yards by running, then he is helping his team.

You can't just throw out 12% of the guy's offensive production just because it helps your argument.

15 TD's and 16 INT's at 59.7% completion percentage as a passer? Not impressed. And again, these numbers have been on a steady decline the past 5 weeks.

And him running the football doesnt impress me. He's a QB. If he is a better runner than a thrower what do you really have?

sentinel33

12-13-2011, 01:18 PM

Kids doin a nice job.

There's more film on him and it's gettin harder for him.

I look forward to year 2 of this kids career.

Not a fan of his prima donna attitude, but he can play.

Can he figure out the defenses as fast as they figure him out?

stay tuned...

snarky

12-13-2011, 01:19 PM

And him running the football doesnt impress me. He's a QB. If he is a better runner than a thrower what do you really have?

That would depend on how good of a thrower he is.

In this case you have a guy who's team is ranked 5th in yards per game and is ranked 8th in red zone productivity.

RuthlessBurgher

12-13-2011, 01:22 PM

Cam is going to be ROY. Panthers wouldn't trade him for any QB in the league not name Aaron Rogers. If Cam re entered himself in this upcoming draft with all these QB's he'd still be the first player taken.

I'm still trying to figure what "tweedle-dee-dumb's" point is.............

If Cam re-entered himself in this upcoming draft, Luck would be the first player taken.

If Luck came out last year, Luck would have been the first player taken.

But Cam still would have been a top 5 guy in either draft. Newton's living up to hype so far (even though he is mired on a bad team; I'd take him over guys like Sanchez and Flacco), but from all I've seen, Luck is the best QB prospect to come out in several years.

Dee Dub

12-13-2011, 01:23 PM

And him running the football doesnt impress me. He's a QB. If he is a better runner than a thrower what do you really have?

That would depend on how good of a thrower he is.

In this case you have a guy who's team is ranked 5th in yards per game and is ranked 8th in red zone productivity.

and he has thrown more picks than TD's and his team is 4-9. Watch. Year two. I will stick to my guns. This kid will have a hard time adjusting. NFL teams have adjusted to him and he has been a below average passer since. Again, what lies between his ears, I think is his biggest weakness.

Jeff George could throw a football with the best of them. But that didnt mean a whole lot.

15 TD's and 16 INT's at 59.7% completion percentage as a passer? Not impressed. And again, these numbers have been on a steady decline the past 5 weeks.

And him running the football doesnt impress me. He's a QB. If he is a better runner than a thrower what do you really have?

Have you actually watched him play this year or are you just going on stats? The kid has a cannon for an arm. His only problem is throwing off his back foot and trying to make every play instead of eating the ball.

Cam also had a 400 yard game in week one. Not sure why you think his passing skils are lacking because he is 4-9 this year.

feltdizz

12-13-2011, 01:51 PM

[quote="Dee Dub":1o24id3v]And him running the football doesnt impress me. He's a QB. If he is a better runner than a thrower what do you really have?

That would depend on how good of a thrower he is.

In this case you have a guy who's team is ranked 5th in yards per game and is ranked 8th in red zone productivity.

and he has thrown more picks than TD's and his team is 4-9. Watch. Year two. I will stick to my guns. This kid will have a hard time adjusting. NFL teams have adjusted to him and he has been a below average passer since. Again, what lies between his ears, I think is his biggest weakness.

Jeff George could throw a football with the best of them. But that didnt mean a whole lot.[/quote:1o24id3v]

..and if he progresses and keeps improving then what? What do we get? :wink:

15 TD's and 16 INT's at 59.7% completion percentage as a passer? Not impressed. And again, these numbers have been on a steady decline the past 5 weeks.

And him running the football doesnt impress me. He's a QB. If he is a better runner than a thrower what do you really have?

Have you actually watched him play this year or are you just going on stats? The kid has a cannon for an arm. His only problem is throwing off his back foot and trying to make every play instead of eating the ball.

Cam also had a 400 yard game in week one. Not sure why you think his passing skils are lacking because he is 4-9 this year.

Yes I have. And you just validated what I have been saying about him.

His passing skills are lacking because of the mistakes he makes throwing the ball. 59.7% and 16 INT's. Think about it.

A cannon of an arm but a Pea Shooter of a head.

Dee Dub

12-13-2011, 01:57 PM

[quote="Dee Dub":365b9656]And him running the football doesnt impress me. He's a QB. If he is a better runner than a thrower what do you really have?

That would depend on how good of a thrower he is.

In this case you have a guy who's team is ranked 5th in yards per game and is ranked 8th in red zone productivity.

and he has thrown more picks than TD's and his team is 4-9. Watch. Year two. I will stick to my guns. This kid will have a hard time adjusting. NFL teams have adjusted to him and he has been a below average passer since. Again, what lies between his ears, I think is his biggest weakness.

Jeff George could throw a football with the best of them. But that didnt mean a whole lot.

..and if he progresses and keeps improving then what? What do we get? :wink:[/quote:365b9656]

Well he's not actually. He has steadily gotten worse the past 5 weeks.

Cam is going to be ROY. Panthers wouldn't trade him for any QB in the league not name Aaron Rogers. If Cam re entered himself in this upcoming draft with all these QB's he'd still be the first player taken.

I'm still trying to figure what "tweedle-dee-dumb's" point is.............

If Cam re-entered himself in this upcoming draft, Luck would be the first player taken.

If Luck came out last year, Luck would have been the first player taken.

But Cam still would have been a top 5 guy in either draft. Newton's living up to hype so far (even though he is mired on a bad team; I'd take him over guys like Sanchez and Flacco), but from all I've seen, Luck is the best QB prospect to come out in several years.

I understand the hype machine, but what exactly has Luck accomplished for anyone to think he's going to any better than Andy Dalton.... Knowing what I have seen, I would take Andy Dalton over Luck, let alone Cam Newton.

Let's see, Luck couldn't pull off the heisman nor a national championship after two stellar years. Couldn't even beat his pack 10 rivals USC and Oregon. Kind of makes you want to say hmmmm.....

Dee Dub

12-13-2011, 02:14 PM

Here's two more...

Career passing and rushing numbers

55.8% 105 TDís 70 INTís 80.0 QBR 5,174 yards rushing 32 TDís

56.6% 207 TDís 134 INTís 81.5 QBR 4,928 yards rushing 35 TDís

Michael Vick and Randall Cunningham

When you are less than 2-1 TD's to INT's, your completion percentage is less than 60%, and your QBR is in the low 80's, how well you run as a QB is irrelevant.

How many post season wins do those QB's have? How many championships do those QB's have?

Cam is going to be ROY. Panthers wouldn't trade him for any QB in the league not name Aaron Rogers. If Cam re entered himself in this upcoming draft with all these QB's he'd still be the first player taken.

I'm still trying to figure what "tweedle-dee-dumb's" point is.............

If Cam re-entered himself in this upcoming draft, Luck would be the first player taken.

If Luck came out last year, Luck would have been the first player taken.

But Cam still would have been a top 5 guy in either draft. Newton's living up to hype so far (even though he is mired on a bad team; I'd take him over guys like Sanchez and Flacco), but from all I've seen, Luck is the best QB prospect to come out in several years.

I understand the hype machine, but what exactly has Luck accomplished for anyone to think he's going to any better than Andy Dalton.... Knowing what I have seen, I would take Andy Dalton over Luck, let alone Cam Newton.

Let's see, Luck couldn't pull off the heisman nor a national championship after two stellar years. Couldn't even beat his pack 10 rivals USC and Oregon. Kind of makes you want to say hmmmm.....

How many Heismans and National Championships have Tom Brady, Aaron Rodgers, Peyton Manning, Drew Brees, and Ben Roethlisberger won between them? Just asking...

Cam is going to be ROY. Panthers wouldn't trade him for any QB in the league not name Aaron Rogers. If Cam re entered himself in this upcoming draft with all these QB's he'd still be the first player taken.

I'm still trying to figure what "tweedle-dee-dumb's" point is.............

If Cam re-entered himself in this upcoming draft, Luck would be the first player taken.

If Luck came out last year, Luck would have been the first player taken.

But Cam still would have been a top 5 guy in either draft. Newton's living up to hype so far (even though he is mired on a bad team; I'd take him over guys like Sanchez and Flacco), but from all I've seen, Luck is the best QB prospect to come out in several years.

I understand the hype machine, but what exactly has Luck accomplished for anyone to think he's going to any better than Andy Dalton.... Knowing what I have seen, I would take Andy Dalton over Luck, let alone Cam Newton.

Let's see, Luck couldn't pull off the heisman nor a national championship after two stellar years. Couldn't even beat his pack 10 rivals USC and Oregon. Kind of makes you want to say hmmmm.....

May wanna get your facts straight first. Luck beat USC this year.

And for the record, Andrew Luck doesnt have top end WR's to throw too. Their offense is a power running game (3 TE set), run first offense. If he had USC's Marquise Lee and Robert Woods he would have shattered every NCAA passing record. Think about it.

papillon

12-13-2011, 02:24 PM

Here's two more...

Career passing and rushing numbers

55.8% 105 TDís 70 INTís 80.0 QBR 5,174 yards rushing 32 TDís

56.6% 207 TDís 134 INTís 81.5 QBR 4,928 yards rushing 35 TDís

Michael Vick and Randall Cunningham

When you are less than 2-1 TD's to INT's, your completion percentage is less than 60%, and your QBR is in the low 80's, how well you run as a QB is irrelevant.

How many post season wins do those QB's have? How many championships do those QB's have?

One of them for sure, different time, different rules, different mentality and the defense was actually allowed to hit anything that moved, not just the guy with the ball.

Pappy

Yeah..let's compare Terry Bradshaw with Cam Newton. Hilarious! :roll:

williar

12-13-2011, 02:28 PM

Still wouldn't take him over Cam Newton or Andy Dalton. So again, what about Andrew Luck makes you think he'g going to Brady, Manning, Marino and Montana rolled into one? I saw him play a couple of times, didn't see nothing but a lot of hype. Maybe you can help me understand.

Yeah..throwing the ball for the Pittsburgh Steelers under Chuck Noll in 1970 is comparable.

And for what it's worth Terry only started 8 games that year.[/quote:3coapdkk]

So being benched forTerry Hanratty is a good thing?

Dee Dub

12-13-2011, 02:32 PM

Still wouldn't take him over Cam Newton or Andy Dalton. So again, what about Andrew Luck makes you think he'g going to Brady, Manning, Marino and Montana rolled into one? I saw him play a couple of times, didn't see nothing but a lot of hype. Maybe you can help me understand.

What offense was Stanford running? If you can honestly answer that question then your argument against Luck is lame.

Luck's arm is as good as it gets. He can make all the throws. He's mobile. Great size. And he doesnt make many mistakes. (21 picks in three years). And get this...only 21 times has he been sacked in 3 years. Think about it.

Dee Dub

12-13-2011, 02:35 PM

By the way, Terry Bradshaw wasnt throwing to Lynn Swann, John Stallworth, Franco Harris, or Rocky Bleier in 1970.

And Brady won three Super Bowls throwing to the likes of David Givens, David Patten and Deion Branch. I made this point the other day and you basically ignored it. For all of his good years, Bradshaw had two HpF receivers to throw to.

feltdizz

12-13-2011, 02:45 PM

[quote=snarky][quote="Dee Dub":2wjqzsfy]And him running the football doesnt impress me. He's a QB. If he is a better runner than a thrower what do you really have?

That would depend on how good of a thrower he is.

In this case you have a guy who's team is ranked 5th in yards per game and is ranked 8th in red zone productivity.

and he has thrown more picks than TD's and his team is 4-9. Watch. Year two. I will stick to my guns. This kid will have a hard time adjusting. NFL teams have adjusted to him and he has been a below average passer since. Again, what lies between his ears, I think is his biggest weakness.

Jeff George could throw a football with the best of them. But that didnt mean a whole lot.

..and if he progresses and keeps improving then what? What do we get? :wink:[/quote:2wjqzsfy]

Well he's not actually. He has steadily gotten worse the past 5 weeks.[/quote:2wjqzsfy]

Talking about year 2.. Cam hasn't gotten worse the last 5 weeks. It's football and QB's have good and bad games, quarters, matchups etc.

Dee Dub

12-13-2011, 02:45 PM

By the way, Terry Bradshaw wasnt throwing to Lynn Swann, John Stallworth, Franco Harris, or Rocky Bleier in 1970.

Thank you. That proves my point. They were both horrible. If you dont have weapons on on offense you cant expect much from any QB.

feltdizz

12-13-2011, 02:53 PM

Cam is going to be ROY. Panthers wouldn't trade him for any QB in the league not name Aaron Rogers. If Cam re entered himself in this upcoming draft with all these QB's he'd still be the first player taken.

I'm still trying to figure what "tweedle-dee-dumb's" point is.............

If Cam re-entered himself in this upcoming draft, Luck would be the first player taken.

If Luck came out last year, Luck would have been the first player taken.

But Cam still would have been a top 5 guy in either draft. Newton's living up to hype so far (even though he is mired on a bad team; I'd take him over guys like Sanchez and Flacco), but from all I've seen, Luck is the best QB prospect to come out in several years.

I understand the hype machine, but what exactly has Luck accomplished for anyone to think he's going to any better than Andy Dalton.... Knowing what I have seen, I would take Andy Dalton over Luck, let alone Cam Newton.

Let's see, Luck couldn't pull off the heisman nor a national championship after two stellar years. Couldn't even beat his pack 10 rivals USC and Oregon. Kind of makes you want to say hmmmm.....

May wanna get your facts straight first. Luck beat USC this year.

And for the record, Andrew Luck doesnt have top end WR's to throw too. Their offense is a power running game (3 TE set), run first offense. If he had USC's Marquise Lee and Robert Woods he would have shattered every NCAA passing record. Think about it.

Luck doesn't have top end WR's or are they protecting his arm from those down field throws.

I have no idea if Luck is legit but we heard about these Luck types before. All the throws, intangibles, size, arm etc...

We have seen what Dalton, Ponder, Yates and Cam can do in the pro's. Luck got cold feet last year and went back to Stanford. I've seen him make decent 10 yard passes over the middle and a few 15 yarder's but I haven't seen Luck avoid the rush and throw a 30 yard dart down field. I haven't seen him throw a crisp 20 yard out either.

Not saying he can't but I won't be surprised if he comes in and struggles with the speed of the NFL. Stanford's schedule was a cake walk this year and against tougher competition I haven't seen anything to get too excited about.

snarky

12-13-2011, 02:54 PM

Talking about year 2.. Cam hasn't gotten worse the last 5 weeks. It's football and QB's have good and bad games, quarters, matchups etc.

4 TD's and 7 Picks the past 5 weeks. And look at his completion percentage.

Take away the game versus the horrible Colts and you are left with...57.5, 57.9, 57.1, and 48.7. That is getting worse.

So over his last five games he is getting worse provided you throw out his best game and keep his worst. OK, got it.

Dee Dub

12-13-2011, 02:54 PM

By the way, Terry Bradshaw wasnt throwing to Lynn Swann, John Stallworth, Franco Harris, or Rocky Bleier in 1970.

And Brady won three Super Bowls throwing to the likes of David Givens, David Patten and Deion Branch. I made this point the other day and you basically ignored it. For all of his good years, Bradshaw had two HpF receivers to throw to.

Uhhhhhh...this thread is about Cam Newton in his rookie year. Not Terry Bradshaw in his glory years.

Cam Newton as of right now...isnt a very good passing QB. His numbers reflect this.

Thank you. That proves my point. They were both horrible. If you dont have weapons on on offense you cant expect much from any QB.

If this proves anything, it proves that we are in no position to predict how Cam Newton's career will play out. In his second year, career back-up grade Hanratty significantly out-performed Bradshaw on the same team. Bradshaw went on to become one of the best QBs of all time (the best, according to some).

feltdizz

12-13-2011, 02:58 PM

Talking about year 2.. Cam hasn't gotten worse the last 5 weeks. It's football and QB's have good and bad games, quarters, matchups etc.

4 TD's and 7 Picks the past 5 weeks. And look at his completion percentage.

Take away the game versus the horrible Colts and you are left with...57.5, 57.9, 57.1, and 48.7. That is getting worse.

why not keep the Colts game since he played in it...

Nothing wrong with a 58% completion rate on a team that was 2-14 and has one legit WR.

Again, not sure what you and other Cam detractors expected from him in year one but I think he surpassed expectations across the board. If he was throwing 15 times a game then I would be concerned with his production but he has to win shootouts because the D is sub par.

I seriously doubt they will ask Cam to throw the ball 50 times a game moving forward. Now it's all about putting him in a position to manage games once they have leads.

Dee Dub

12-13-2011, 02:59 PM

Talking about year 2.. Cam hasn't gotten worse the last 5 weeks. It's football and QB's have good and bad games, quarters, matchups etc.

4 TD's and 7 Picks the past 5 weeks. And look at his completion percentage.

Take away the game versus the horrible Colts and you are left with...57.5, 57.9, 57.1, and 48.7. That is getting worse.

So over his last five games he is getting worse provided you throw out his best game and keep his worst. OK, got it.

The Colts may go down as one of the worst teams of all time. But if you think that game is important in regards to evaluating Cam Newton then you and I will probably never be on the same page.

By the way, that game versus the Colts, wasnt all that for him. He threw for 208 yards and had no TD's passes.

And Brady won three Super Bowls throwing to the likes of David Givens, David Patten and Deion Branch. I made this point the other day and you basically ignored it. For all of his good years, Bradshaw had two HpF receivers to throw to.

Uhhhhhh...this thread is about Cam Newton in his rookie year. Not Terry Bradshaw in his glory years.

Cam Newton as of right now...isnt a very good passing QB. His numbers reflect this.

Nuff said.[/quote:vf9hpce8]

Just pointing out that you seem to be using different logic between the two. If the quality of receivers matter for one QB they should matter for all Qbs. Otherwise, you are just talking out both sides of your mouth.

And Brady won three Super Bowls throwing to the likes of David Givens, David Patten and Deion Branch. I made this point the other day and you basically ignored it. For all of his good years, Bradshaw had two HpF receivers to throw to.

Uhhhhhh...this thread is about Cam Newton in his rookie year. Not Terry Bradshaw in his glory years.

Cam Newton as of right now...isnt a very good passing QB. His numbers reflect this.

Nuff said.[/quote:1n30e1u3]

:roll: coming from a guy who bashed Pouncey for having a tummy ache I think your conclusion lacks credibility.

snarky

12-13-2011, 03:02 PM

[quote=feltdizz]
Talking about year 2.. Cam hasn't gotten worse the last 5 weeks. It's football and QB's have good and bad games, quarters, matchups etc.

4 TD's and 7 Picks the past 5 weeks. And look at his completion percentage.

Take away the game versus the horrible Colts and you are left with...57.5, 57.9, 57.1, and 48.7. That is getting worse.

So over his last five games he is getting worse provided you throw out his best game and keep his worst. OK, got it.

The Colts may go down as one of the worst teams of all time. But if you think that game is important in regards to evaluating Cam Newton then you and I will probably never be on the same page.

By the way, that game versus the Colts, wasnt all that for him. He threw for 208 yards and had no TD's passes.[/quote:27dwt5z4]

Yeah but unless you are going to go through the stats of every QB and throw out his stats against the bad teams, all you are doing is exercising bias against Newton. Every QB in the history of the league has padded his stats against bad teams.

Dee Dub

12-13-2011, 03:04 PM

Talking about year 2.. Cam hasn't gotten worse the last 5 weeks. It's football and QB's have good and bad games, quarters, matchups etc.

4 TD's and 7 Picks the past 5 weeks. And look at his completion percentage.

Take away the game versus the horrible Colts and you are left with...57.5, 57.9, 57.1, and 48.7. That is getting worse.

why not keep the Colts game since he played in it...

Nothing wrong with a 58% completion rate on a team that was 2-14 and has one legit WR.

Again, not sure what you and other Cam detractors expected from him in year one but I think he surpassed expectations across the board. If he was throwing 15 times a game then I would be concerned with his production but he has to win shootouts because the D is sub par.

I seriously doubt they will ask Cam to throw the ball 50 times a game moving forward. Now it's all about putting him in a position to manage games once they have leads.

I guess you are the one not watching Cam's games?? How can you say he only has one legit WR? Do you just throw out his TEs and RB's? Take a look at Olsen, Shockey, and Stewart in regards to receptions.

feltdizz

12-13-2011, 03:05 PM

[quote=feltdizz]
Talking about year 2.. Cam hasn't gotten worse the last 5 weeks. It's football and QB's have good and bad games, quarters, matchups etc.

4 TD's and 7 Picks the past 5 weeks. And look at his completion percentage.

Take away the game versus the horrible Colts and you are left with...57.5, 57.9, 57.1, and 48.7. That is getting worse.

So over his last five games he is getting worse provided you throw out his best game and keep his worst. OK, got it.

The Colts may go down as one of the worst teams of all time. But if you think that game is important in regards to evaluating Cam Newton then you and I will probably never be on the same page.

By the way, that game versus the Colts, wasnt all that for him. He threw for 208 yards and had no TD's passes.[/quote:2imyr7nr]

We used the Colts to evaluate our talent after we barely beat them so what's the difference. It's no more or less important then the next game. But if Cam lost that game you would use it over and over again to prove some point.

...and no, we will never be on the same page. Remember your love fest for Mendenhall? Well that sure changed didn't it.

Like the other guy just said.. we have no idea how things will turn out for Cam but right now? He is probably a lock for ROY and Charlotte is once again excited to watch football.

feltdizz

12-13-2011, 03:07 PM

[quote=feltdizz]
Talking about year 2.. Cam hasn't gotten worse the last 5 weeks. It's football and QB's have good and bad games, quarters, matchups etc.

4 TD's and 7 Picks the past 5 weeks. And look at his completion percentage.

Take away the game versus the horrible Colts and you are left with...57.5, 57.9, 57.1, and 48.7. That is getting worse.

why not keep the Colts game since he played in it...

Nothing wrong with a 58% completion rate on a team that was 2-14 and has one legit WR.

Again, not sure what you and other Cam detractors expected from him in year one but I think he surpassed expectations across the board. If he was throwing 15 times a game then I would be concerned with his production but he has to win shootouts because the D is sub par.

I seriously doubt they will ask Cam to throw the ball 50 times a game moving forward. Now it's all about putting him in a position to manage games once they have leads.

I guess you are the one not watching Cam's games?? How can you say he only has one legit WR? Do you just throw out his TEs and RB's? Take a look at Olsen, Shockey, and Stewart in regards to receptions.[/quote:39x5dac7]

And Brady won three Super Bowls throwing to the likes of David Givens, David Patten and Deion Branch. I made this point the other day and you basically ignored it. For all of his good years, Bradshaw had two HpF receivers to throw to.

Uhhhhhh...this thread is about Cam Newton in his rookie year. Not Terry Bradshaw in his glory years.

Cam Newton as of right now...isnt a very good passing QB. His numbers reflect this.

Nuff said.

Just pointing out that you seem to be using different logic between the two. If the quality of receivers matter for one QB they should matter for all Qbs. Otherwise, you are just talking out both sides of your mouth.[/quote:6djn3lqb]

This thread title is "Cam Newton coming back to earth". Can anyone here prove me wrong? Is Cam Newton not playing as well as he did early on in the year?

Thank you.

Dee Dub

12-13-2011, 03:12 PM

because he only has one legit WR fool!

Those other guys are TE's and RB's....

So only WR's dictate whether or not you have legitimate targets to throw too?

The name calling isnt necessary..and if I am not mistaken it is also a violation of the code of conduct here? Correct?

And Brady won three Super Bowls throwing to the likes of David Givens, David Patten and Deion Branch. I made this point the other day and you basically ignored it. For all of his good years, Bradshaw had two HpF receivers to throw to.

Uhhhhhh...this thread is about Cam Newton in his rookie year. Not Terry Bradshaw in his glory years.

Cam Newton as of right now...isnt a very good passing QB. His numbers reflect this.

Nuff said.

:roll: coming from a guy who bashed Pouncey for having a tummy ache I think your conclusion lacks credibility.[/quote:3hygy7is]

So what I said in one thread carries over to all thread topics? Kind of like all black people like chicken, huh?

Can we not have one descent discussion without posters resorting to stuff like this? Really?

And Brady won three Super Bowls throwing to the likes of David Givens, David Patten and Deion Branch. I made this point the other day and you basically ignored it. For all of his good years, Bradshaw had two HpF receivers to throw to.

Uhhhhhh...this thread is about Cam Newton in his rookie year. Not Terry Bradshaw in his glory years.

Cam Newton as of right now...isnt a very good passing QB. His numbers reflect this.

Nuff said.

Just pointing out that you seem to be using different logic between the two. If the quality of receivers matter for one QB they should matter for all Qbs. Otherwise, you are just talking out both sides of your mouth.[/quote:34btxorc]

This thread title is "Cam Newton coming back to earth". Can anyone here prove me wrong? Is Cam Newton not playing as well as he did early on in the year?

Thank you.[/quote:34btxorc]

I get what the thread is about, but don't you think you lose some credibility when you use one argument in thread A and the opposite argument in thread B?

Dee Dub

12-13-2011, 03:19 PM

[quote=feltdizz]
Talking about year 2.. Cam hasn't gotten worse the last 5 weeks. It's football and QB's have good and bad games, quarters, matchups etc.

4 TD's and 7 Picks the past 5 weeks. And look at his completion percentage.

Take away the game versus the horrible Colts and you are left with...57.5, 57.9, 57.1, and 48.7. That is getting worse.

So over his last five games he is getting worse provided you throw out his best game and keep his worst. OK, got it.

The Colts may go down as one of the worst teams of all time. But if you think that game is important in regards to evaluating Cam Newton then you and I will probably never be on the same page.

By the way, that game versus the Colts, wasnt all that for him. He threw for 208 yards and had no TD's passes.

We used the Colts to evaluate our talent after we barely beat them so what's the difference. It's no more or less important then the next game. But if Cam lost that game you would use it over and over again to prove some point.

...and no, we will never be on the same page. Remember your love fest for Mendenhall? Well that sure changed didn't it.

Like the other guy just said.. we have no idea how things will turn out for Cam but right now? He is probably a lock for ROY and Charlotte is once again excited to watch football.[/quote:3goj41mr]

If you wanna focus on the one game in the last 5 for Cam (which was a descent game at best for him), and ignore the other 4 of those last 5 games of his, then you are of course not going to see the point that he is not playing as well as he was early on in the year.

And I personally think that what we have seen of Cam Newton is what we will pretty much always see of him. I do not think he will ever be above average as a passer in the NFL. He may put up a ton of yards, but as a passer, he will struggle with completion percentage and he will have more INT's than a good passer would have. Mistakes in the passing game will always limit who he is as a passer.

And Brady won three Super Bowls throwing to the likes of David Givens, David Patten and Deion Branch. I made this point the other day and you basically ignored it. For all of his good years, Bradshaw had two HpF receivers to throw to.

Uhhhhhh...this thread is about Cam Newton in his rookie year. Not Terry Bradshaw in his glory years.

Cam Newton as of right now...isnt a very good passing QB. His numbers reflect this.

Nuff said.

Just pointing out that you seem to be using different logic between the two. If the quality of receivers matter for one QB they should matter for all Qbs. Otherwise, you are just talking out both sides of your mouth.[/quote:3nyw3m42]

This thread title is "Cam Newton coming back to earth". Can anyone here prove me wrong? Is Cam Newton not playing as well as he did early on in the year?

Thank you.[/quote:3nyw3m42]

Cam was never playing head and shoulders to begin with.... the 400 yard game put him on the map because he was said to be a running QB with no arm.

If you add in his rushing TD's I think it puts him in pretty good company as a starting QB.

Dee Dub

12-13-2011, 03:24 PM

I get what the thread is about, but don't you think you lose some credibility when you use one argument in thread A and the opposite argument in thread B?

No...you are the one trying to take what I said in a different thread topic and use it towards a thread topic about Cam Newton struggling in his last 4 out of 5 games. Two different topics altogether.

I have always been of the opinion that Cam isnt that good as a QB in relation to throwing the football. I said when teams make adjustments and have enough game film on him he will struggle. And this is is exactly what has happened.

And I think when he faces some adversary ( like after a couple of years of not winning), he is going to buckle even more.

feltdizz

12-13-2011, 03:26 PM

because he only has one legit WR fool!

Those other guys are TE's and RB's....

So only WR's dictate whether or not you have legitimate targets to throw too?

The name calling isnt necessary..and if I am not mistaken it is also a violation of the code of conduct here? Correct?

I'm sorry but when I say a team has one legit WR and you throw out other positions as proof he has more than one good WIDE RECEIVER it sounds foolish.

snarky

12-13-2011, 03:26 PM

I get what the thread is about, but don't you think you lose some credibility when you use one argument in thread A and the opposite argument in thread B?

No...you are the one trying to take what I said in a different thread topic and use it towards a thread topic about Cam Newton struggling in his last 4 out of 5 games. Two different topics altogether.

I have always been of the opinion that Cam isnt that good as a QB in relation to throwing the football. I said when teams make adjustments and have enough game film on him he will struggle. And this is is exactly what has happened.

And I think when he faces some adversary ( like after a couple of years of not winning), he is going to buckle even more.

OK so a simple Yes/No question then (just so I'm clear): Does the quality of WRs a QB is throwing to matter when evaluating a QB or comparing QBs?

Dee Dub

12-13-2011, 03:32 PM

Cam was never playing head and shoulders to begin with.... the 400 yard game put him on the map because he was said to be a running QB with no arm.

If you add in his rushing TD's I think it puts him in pretty good company as a starting QB.

Felt, this isnt true. If you know anything about Cam Newton you know that he has always had a great arm (powerful strong arm). Who said he had no arm? Did you see him at Auburn? Did you read what was said at his private work out from Trent Dilfer? The scouting reports abut his arm before he ever came into the NFL?

The knock has always been will he be successful at reading NFL defenses. We he be accurate enough. Will his decision making in the pocket lead to success and also growth as a passer?

I say no. And his decline of late seems to indicate this.

feltdizz

12-13-2011, 03:33 PM

I get what the thread is about, but don't you think you lose some credibility when you use one argument in thread A and the opposite argument in thread B?

No...you are the one trying to take what I said in a different thread topic and use it towards a thread topic about Cam Newton struggling in his last 4 out of 5 games. Two different topics altogether.

I have always been of the opinion that Cam isnt that good as a QB in relation to throwing the football. I said when teams make adjustments and have enough game film on him he will struggle. And this is is exactly what has happened.

And I think when he faces some adversary ( like after a couple of years of not winning), he is going to buckle even more.

They have led in 12 of 13 games at half.. they have a new coaching staff and a rookie QB. How in the hell can you make this statement. What's it based on? Surely not facts and logic. I know you are hoping Cam doesn't succeed but the reality is a bad 2-14 team is much better now with Cam and next year with OTA's and a full summer working with players plus getting a favorable draft position it looks like this team will easily improve next year.

I could see if the Panthers looked like trash but they have lost about 6 games by less then a TD and led at halftime in 5 of them. If anything the coaching adjustments are the real problem.

feltdizz

12-13-2011, 03:37 PM

Cam was never playing head and shoulders to begin with.... the 400 yard game put him on the map because he was said to be a running QB with no arm.

If you add in his rushing TD's I think it puts him in pretty good company as a starting QB.

Felt, this isnt true. If you know anything about Cam Newton you know that he has always had a great arm (powerful strong arm). Who said he had no arm? Did you see him at Auburn? Did you read what was said at his private work out from Trent Dilfer? The scouting reports abut his arm before he ever came into the NFL?

The knock has always been will he be successful at reading NFL defenses. We he be accurate enough. Will his decision making in the pocket lead to success and also growth as a passer?

I say no. And his decline of late seems to indicate this.

bad choice of words. I meant they said he wouldn't have success as a passing QB in the NFL.

Like I just wrote.. if you really watched Cam this year, I've seen almost every game, you will see a team who stomps on teams early but has no clue how to counter a teams adjustments at halftime.

No NFL QB grows without hitting a few bumps in the road. Your prediction is way too early and smells of wishing and hoping. It takes YEARS to evaluate a QB and you use the last 5 games as an indication of a career?

Wow.

Dee Dub

12-13-2011, 03:37 PM

because he only has one legit WR fool!

Those other guys are TE's and RB's....

So only WR's dictate whether or not you have legitimate targets to throw too?

The name calling isnt necessary..and if I am not mistaken it is also a violation of the code of conduct here? Correct?

I'm sorry but when I say a team has one legit WR and you throw out other positions as proof he has more than one good WIDE RECEIVER it sounds foolish.

How is that foolish when Cam Newton has several targets he throws too? Their offense uses the TE and RB in their passing game more than most teams.

And question....If Legedu Naanee finishes the season at over 50 receptions as the #2 WR on his team, is he still not a legit WR?

Dee Dub

12-13-2011, 03:42 PM

I get what the thread is about, but don't you think you lose some credibility when you use one argument in thread A and the opposite argument in thread B?

No...you are the one trying to take what I said in a different thread topic and use it towards a thread topic about Cam Newton struggling in his last 4 out of 5 games. Two different topics altogether.

I have always been of the opinion that Cam isnt that good as a QB in relation to throwing the football. I said when teams make adjustments and have enough game film on him he will struggle. And this is is exactly what has happened.

And I think when he faces some adversary ( like after a couple of years of not winning), he is going to buckle even more.

They have led in 12 of 13 games at half.. they have a new coaching staff and a rookie QB. How in the hell can you make this statement. What's it based on? Surely not facts and logic. I know you are hoping Cam doesn't succeed but the reality is a bad 2-14 team is much better now with Cam and next year with OTA's and a full summer working with players plus getting a favorable draft position it looks like this team will easily improve next year.

I could see if the Panthers looked like trash but they have lost about 6 games by less then a TD and led at halftime in 5 of them. If anything the coaching adjustments are the real problem.

Ok...here we now have the excuses why. Got it.

feltdizz

12-13-2011, 03:44 PM

[quote=feltdizz]

because he only has one legit WR fool!

Those other guys are TE's and RB's....

So only WR's dictate whether or not you have legitimate targets to throw too?

The name calling isnt necessary..and if I am not mistaken it is also a violation of the code of conduct here? Correct?

I'm sorry but when I say a team has one legit WR and you throw out other positions as proof he has more than one good WIDE RECEIVER it sounds foolish.

How is that foolish when Cam Newton has several targets he throws too? Their offense uses the TE and RB in their passing game more than most teams.

And question....If Legedu Naanee finishes the season at over 50 receptions as the #2 WR on his team, is he still not a legit WR?[/quote:3f2939da]

In Charlotte he is called NeNone... he may turn into a legit #2 but right now he isn't.

When we were thin at WR we didn't point out Ced's stats or El's stats or our RB or TE's receptions as proof Ben had weapons at WR, we went out and got legit WR's.

If the Panthers are smart they will do the same.

feltdizz

12-13-2011, 03:45 PM

[quote=snarky]
I get what the thread is about, but don't you think you lose some credibility when you use one argument in thread A and the opposite argument in thread B?

No...you are the one trying to take what I said in a different thread topic and use it towards a thread topic about Cam Newton struggling in his last 4 out of 5 games. Two different topics altogether.

I have always been of the opinion that Cam isnt that good as a QB in relation to throwing the football. I said when teams make adjustments and have enough game film on him he will struggle. And this is is exactly what has happened.

And I think when he faces some adversary ( like after a couple of years of not winning), he is going to buckle even more.

They have led in 12 of 13 games at half.. they have a new coaching staff and a rookie QB. How in the hell can you make this statement. What's it based on? Surely not facts and logic. I know you are hoping Cam doesn't succeed but the reality is a bad 2-14 team is much better now with Cam and next year with OTA's and a full summer working with players plus getting a favorable draft position it looks like this team will easily improve next year.

I could see if the Panthers looked like trash but they have lost about 6 games by less then a TD and led at halftime in 5 of them. If anything the coaching adjustments are the real problem.

Ok...here we now have the excuses why. Got it.[/quote:2wkqsszm]

Good. Thread is done son!

Dee Dub

12-13-2011, 03:51 PM

bad choice of words. I meant they said he wouldn't have success as a passing QB in the NFL.

And so far those knocks have been correct.

Like I just wrote.. if you really watched Cam this year, I've seen almost every game, you will see a team who stomps on teams early but has no clue how to counter a teams adjustments at halftime.

And this goes to my lack of quality decision making. When the game is on the line and teams gear down to stop him, he will struggle.

No NFL QB grows without hitting a few bumps in the road. Your prediction is way too early and smells of wishing and hoping. It takes YEARS to evaluate a QB and you use the last 5 games as an indication of a career?

Wow.

I have seen enough of him to know that he isnt going to be too much more than what he is now as a passer. And again, wait till he faces tough times.

Dee Dub

12-13-2011, 03:59 PM

[quote=feltdizz]

because he only has one legit WR fool!

Those other guys are TE's and RB's....

So only WR's dictate whether or not you have legitimate targets to throw too?

The name calling isnt necessary..and if I am not mistaken it is also a violation of the code of conduct here? Correct?

I'm sorry but when I say a team has one legit WR and you throw out other positions as proof he has more than one good WIDE RECEIVER it sounds foolish.

How is that foolish when Cam Newton has several targets he throws too? Their offense uses the TE and RB in their passing game more than most teams.

And question....If Legedu Naanee finishes the season at over 50 receptions as the #2 WR on his team, is he still not a legit WR?

In Charlotte he is called NeNone... he may turn into a legit #2 but right now he isn't.

When we were thin at WR we didn't point out Ced's stats or El's stats or our RB or TE's receptions as proof Ben had weapons at WR, we went out and got legit WR's.

If the Panthers are smart they will do the same.[/quote:2mztxct1]

Your arguments are always ignoring facts. NeNone as you call him currently has 40 receptions on the year. Cedric Wilson never had more than 37 in a year for the Steelers. And Randle El had 47 receptions his first year as a Steeler and every year after that with the Steelers his numbers declined. Naanee on the other has been improving over his career. It appears as if he is actually developing into a descent #2.

papillon

12-13-2011, 04:01 PM

[quote="Dee Dub":eno6kh2v]Here's two more...

Career passing and rushing numbers

55.8% 105 TDís 70 INTís 80.0 QBR 5,174 yards rushing 32 TDís

56.6% 207 TDís 134 INTís 81.5 QBR 4,928 yards rushing 35 TDís

Michael Vick and Randall Cunningham

When you are less than 2-1 TD's to INT's, your completion percentage is less than 60%, and your QBR is in the low 80's, how well you run as a QB is irrelevant.

How many post season wins do those QB's have? How many championships do those QB's have?

As Cris Carter would say, "C'mon man", I'm just having a little fun with you

Pappy

snarky

12-13-2011, 04:05 PM

Your arguments are always ignoring facts. NeNone as you call him currently has 40 receptions on the year. Cedric Wilson never had more than 37 in a year for the Steelers. And Randle El had 47 receptions his first year as a Steeler and every year after that with the Steelers his numbers declined. Naanee on the other has been improving over his career. It appears as if he is actually developing into a descent #2.

Most of that improvement seems to be since he started playing with Newton.

snarky

12-13-2011, 04:06 PM

I get what the thread is about, but don't you think you lose some credibility when you use one argument in thread A and the opposite argument in thread B?

No...you are the one trying to take what I said in a different thread topic and use it towards a thread topic about Cam Newton struggling in his last 4 out of 5 games. Two different topics altogether.

I have always been of the opinion that Cam isnt that good as a QB in relation to throwing the football. I said when teams make adjustments and have enough game film on him he will struggle. And this is is exactly what has happened.

And I think when he faces some adversary ( like after a couple of years of not winning), he is going to buckle even more.

OK so a simple Yes/No question then (just so I'm clear): Does the quality of WRs a QB is throwing to matter when evaluating a QB or comparing QBs?

No answer for this?

Dee Dub

12-13-2011, 04:25 PM

Your arguments are always ignoring facts. NeNone as you call him currently has 40 receptions on the year. Cedric Wilson never had more than 37 in a year for the Steelers. And Randle El had 47 receptions his first year as a Steeler and every year after that with the Steelers his numbers declined. Naanee on the other has been improving over his career. It appears as if he is actually developing into a descent #2.

Most of that improvement seems to be since Newton arrived.

Not exactly correct. He was buried in San Diego. When he first came up the pecking order for receptions was Antonio Gates, LaDanian Tomlinson, Vincent Jackson, Malcolm Floyd. How much can you grow when you are like the 5th option? How about the fact that he is finally getting an opportunity?

feltdizz

12-13-2011, 04:26 PM

Your arguments are always ignoring facts. NeNone as you call him currently has 40 receptions on the year. Cedric Wilson never had more than 37 in a year for the Steelers. And Randle El had 47 receptions his first year as a Steeler and every year after that with the Steelers his numbers declined. Naanee on the other has been improving over his career. It appears as if he is actually developing into a descent #2.

The actual stats of Ced and El have little to do with the argument. It's the quality of their work and they weren't legit WR's...

Maybe NaNe will develop but right now Carolina has 1 legit WR. NeNone is what they call him in Charlotte.

feltdizz

12-13-2011, 04:27 PM

[quote="Dee Dub":1k3z6ty2]
Your arguments are always ignoring facts. NeNone as you call him currently has 40 receptions on the year. Cedric Wilson never had more than 37 in a year for the Steelers. And Randle El had 47 receptions his first year as a Steeler and every year after that with the Steelers his numbers declined. Naanee on the other has been improving over his career. It appears as if he is actually developing into a descent #2.

Most of that improvement seems to be since Newton arrived.

Not exactly correct. He was buried in San Diego. When he first came up the pecking order for receptions was Antonio Gates, LaDanian Tomlinson, Vincent Jackson, Malcolm Floyd. How much can you grow when you are like the 5th option? How about the fact that he is finally getting an opportunity?[/quote:1k3z6ty2]

good to see you can make excuses too. :lol:

Dee Dub

12-13-2011, 04:30 PM

I get what the thread is about, but don't you think you lose some credibility when you use one argument in thread A and the opposite argument in thread B?

No...you are the one trying to take what I said in a different thread topic and use it towards a thread topic about Cam Newton struggling in his last 4 out of 5 games. Two different topics altogether.

I have always been of the opinion that Cam isnt that good as a QB in relation to throwing the football. I said when teams make adjustments and have enough game film on him he will struggle. And this is is exactly what has happened.

And I think when he faces some adversary ( like after a couple of years of not winning), he is going to buckle even more.

OK so a simple Yes/No question then (just so I'm clear): Does the quality of WRs a QB is throwing to matter when evaluating a QB or comparing QBs?

No answer for this?

In this case, for this thread, no. Cam Newton has plenty of quality players to throw too.

Dude if you just want to argue with me or attack my threads why not just keep it to sending me a personal message? We get it. You dont like me. Does the board and every thread topic I bring out have to be about you trying to prove I was wrong in a thread 20 threads ago?

feltdizz

12-13-2011, 04:32 PM

bad choice of words. I meant they said he wouldn't have success as a passing QB in the NFL.

And so far those knocks have been correct.

Like I just wrote.. if you really watched Cam this year, I've seen almost every game, you will see a team who stomps on teams early but has no clue how to counter a teams adjustments at halftime.

And this goes to my lack of quality decision making. When the game is on the line and teams gear down to stop him, he will struggle.

No NFL QB grows without hitting a few bumps in the road. Your prediction is way too early and smells of wishing and hoping. It takes YEARS to evaluate a QB and you use the last 5 games as an indication of a career?

Wow.

I have seen enough of him to know that he isnt going to be too much more than what he is now as a passer. And again, wait till he faces tough times.

You haven't seen enough of Cam... none of us have. It's too early to predict what his career will be.

What about Mendenhall. Remember those predictions? You bash him more than I do. LOL..

Truth is, every year is different and you have nothing more than your opinion to go on regarding Cam. Funny how every other expert, analyst etc says Cam is going to grow and become better but Dee Dub the "I saw him on before the game for a few seconds" knows it all.

You do this all the time and only revisit your predictions when they are right. When they are wrong you dance more then Mendenhall.

feltdizz

12-13-2011, 04:34 PM

In this case, for this thread, no. Cam Newton has plenty of quality players to throw too.

Dude if you just want to argue with me or attack my threads why not just keep it to sending me a personal message? We get it. You dont like me. Does the board and every thread topic I bring out have to be about you trying to prove I was wrong in a thread 20 threads ago?

stop crying.. once again you make a post with an idiotic prediction and then get mad when people disagree.

You can't predict the future so why are you getting mad when people tell you this?

Dee Dub

12-13-2011, 04:34 PM

[quote="Dee Dub":2y15mr56]
Your arguments are always ignoring facts. NeNone as you call him currently has 40 receptions on the year. Cedric Wilson never had more than 37 in a year for the Steelers. And Randle El had 47 receptions his first year as a Steeler and every year after that with the Steelers his numbers declined. Naanee on the other has been improving over his career. It appears as if he is actually developing into a descent #2.

Most of that improvement seems to be since Newton arrived.

Not exactly correct. He was buried in San Diego. When he first came up the pecking order for receptions was Antonio Gates, LaDanian Tomlinson, Vincent Jackson, Malcolm Floyd. How much can you grow when you are like the 5th option? How about the fact that he is finally getting an opportunity?

good to see you can make excuses too. :lol:[/quote:2y15mr56]

Being young and behind two future hall of famers is what I would consider a legit excuse.

snarky

12-13-2011, 04:35 PM

[quote="Dee Dub":25to5gw4]
Your arguments are always ignoring facts. NeNone as you call him currently has 40 receptions on the year. Cedric Wilson never had more than 37 in a year for the Steelers. And Randle El had 47 receptions his first year as a Steeler and every year after that with the Steelers his numbers declined. Naanee on the other has been improving over his career. It appears as if he is actually developing into a descent #2.

Most of that improvement seems to be since Newton arrived.

Not exactly correct. He was buried in San Diego. When he first came up the pecking order for receptions was Antonio Gates, LaDanian Tomlinson, Vincent Jackson, Malcolm Floyd. How much can you grow when you are like the 5th option? How about the fact that he is finally getting an opportunity?[/quote:25to5gw4]

Right. My bad.

Still, look at the guys around him for receiving last year: Patrick Crayton started two games and outproduced him by 35%. Ajirotutu had zero starts and had more than 2/3rds his receiving yards. The guy had nine starts last year and his production is comparable to that of a seaon-long back-up.

feltdizz

12-13-2011, 04:36 PM

[quote=snarky][quote="Dee Dub":e6epyym2]
Your arguments are always ignoring facts. NeNone as you call him currently has 40 receptions on the year. Cedric Wilson never had more than 37 in a year for the Steelers. And Randle El had 47 receptions his first year as a Steeler and every year after that with the Steelers his numbers declined. Naanee on the other has been improving over his career. It appears as if he is actually developing into a descent #2.

Most of that improvement seems to be since Newton arrived.

Not exactly correct. He was buried in San Diego. When he first came up the pecking order for receptions was Antonio Gates, LaDanian Tomlinson, Vincent Jackson, Malcolm Floyd. How much can you grow when you are like the 5th option? How about the fact that he is finally getting an opportunity?

good to see you can make excuses too. :lol:[/quote:e6epyym2]

Being young and behind two future hall of famers is what I would consider a legit excuse.[/quote:e6epyym2]

being young is an excuse? :Blah

how about being young, having a rookie HC, new OC and DC on a 2-14 team? Nah... no excuses for that young man who is about to win ROY.

snarky

12-13-2011, 04:44 PM

In this case, for this thread, no. Cam Newton has plenty of quality players to throw too.

OK, but in this very thread you said we couldn't/shouldn't compare Cam's rookie numbers to Terry Bradshaw's rookie numbers because of who Bradshaw was throwing to. Wow dude, you change your story so much you can't even keep it straight. In this thread you were making the case that WRs matter. In the other case you seemed to be making the opposite case.

Not going to address the rest of what you said because it is just plain nonsense.

feltdizz

12-13-2011, 06:06 PM

In this case, for this thread, no. Cam Newton has plenty of quality players to throw too.

OK, but in this very thread you said we couldn't/shouldn't compare Cam's rookie numbers to Terry Bradshaw's rookie numbers because of who Bradshaw was throwing to. Wow dude, you change your story so much you can't even keep it straight. In this thread you were making the case that WRs matter. In the other case you seemed to be making the opposite case.

Not going to address the rest of what you said because it is just plain nonsense.

Dub is just typing to pass the time LOL

Dee Dub

12-13-2011, 06:52 PM

In this case, for this thread, no. Cam Newton has plenty of quality players to throw too.

OK, but in this very thread you said we couldn't/shouldn't compare Cam's rookie numbers to Terry Bradshaw's rookie numbers because of who Bradshaw was throwing to. Wow dude, you change your story so much you can't even keep it straight. In this thread you were making the case that WRs matter. In the other case you seemed to be making the opposite case.

Not going to address the rest of what you said because it is just plain nonsense.

I didnt bring up Bradshaw in this thread. Ruthless did. I just pointed who Bradshaw was throwing to in 1970.

What I think is...any comparison of Can Newton Terry Bradshaw is ridiculous. Whatever the comparison is too. We are talking about a 4 time super bowl champion to one I dont think will ever win any championships.

grotonsteel

12-13-2011, 06:54 PM

7 pages of discussion on Cam Newton??? :shock: :)

Forget stats..Is Cam Newton better than Michael Vick??

I would say he is 100X better than Tim Tebow though. :wink:

I think its too early to pass judgement on Cam Newton but going by his father's antics of pimping his son in college i expect SCam Newton to self destruct.

Dee Dub

12-13-2011, 06:57 PM

7 pages of discussion on Cam Newton??? :shock: :)

Forget stats..Is Cam Newton better than Michael Vick??

I would say he is 100X better than Tim Tebow though. :wink:

I think its too early to pass judgement on Cam Newton but going by his father's antics of pimping his son in college i expect SCam Newton to self destruct.

grotonsteel, you gotta know most every thread I put out here whether it is right on or not, it's going to generate discussion.

And I agree with you about Cam Newton. In time he will continue to slide.

RuthlessBurgher

12-13-2011, 07:06 PM

you gotta know most every thread I put out here whether it is right on or not, it's going to generate discussion.

Congratulations. You're becoming the Mark Madden of message board posters. Just post some ridiculous nonsense like Pouncey's a wuss or Cam Newton sucks, and people will respond to the sheer absurdity of it all. You may get the attention you crave, but in the process might start to lose the respect of the knowledgable folks that know that you are better than the schtick that you are currently flinging (throwing out a random opinion then refusing to even consider any other even slightly different opinion, regardless of how much your point has been refuted).

Steelerphile

12-13-2011, 07:10 PM

At this point I'm thinking of Dee Dub as a windy crackpot. I'm losing respect for him. He considers himself a fount of football wisdom. Has a much greater opinion of himself than he should.

snarky

12-13-2011, 07:14 PM

[quote="Dee Dub":3sa180ab]

In this case, for this thread, no. Cam Newton has plenty of quality players to throw too.

OK, but in this very thread you said we couldn't/shouldn't compare Cam's rookie numbers to Terry Bradshaw's rookie numbers because of who Bradshaw was throwing to. Wow dude, you change your story so much you can't even keep it straight. In this thread you were making the case that WRs matter. In the other case you seemed to be making the opposite case.

Not going to address the rest of what you said because it is just plain nonsense.

I didnt bring up Bradshaw in this thread. Ruthless did. I just pointed who Bradshaw was throwing to in 1970.

What I think is...any comparison of Can Newton Terry Bradshaw is ridiculous. Whatever the comparison is too. We are talking about a 4 time super bowl champion to one I dont think will ever win any championships.[/quote:3sa180ab]

IIRC, Ruthless compared Bradshaw's rookie year to Newton's rookie season which seems legitimate enough. Anyway, it matters little who brought it up. Once it was brought up you chimed in with a list of his receivers which (seemingly) was an attempt to justify his low production that year.

Dee Dub

12-13-2011, 07:14 PM

you gotta know most every thread I put out here whether it is right on or not, it's going to generate discussion.

Congratulations. You're becoming the Mark Madden of message board posters. Just post some ridiculous nonsense like Pouncey's a wuss or Cam Newton sucks, and people will respond to the sheer absurdity of it all. You may get the attention you crave, but in the process might start to lose the respect of the knowledgable folks that know that you are better than the schtick that you are currently flinging (throwing out a random opinion then refusing to even consider any other even slightly different opinion, regardless of how much your point has been refuted).

Really?? First of all these threads are my honest opinions. I would hardly say I am seeking attention for then. We all arent alike. And Ruthless does it really matter what people on a message board think of me? Or whether or not they respect me? Seriously? I dont come here for that. I come here to talk football and give/vent my opinion about it. Am I suppose to be trying to get inside of some cool car of guys on this board so i can be liked? I respect others on this forum because of who I am inside. The fact that I have given my life over to God. But I dont expect others to respect me just because of what I think about football.

Where did I ever say Cam Newton sucks? I just dont think he will ever make it in the league as a passer. Period.

But I get it. It's cool.

Dee Dub

12-13-2011, 07:19 PM

At this point I'm thinking of Dee Dub as a windy crackpot. I'm losing respect for him. He considers himself a fount of football wisdom. Has a much greater opinion of himself than he should.

Thanks.

Dee Dub

12-13-2011, 07:22 PM

you gotta know most every thread I put out here whether it is right on or not, it's going to generate discussion.

Congratulations. You're becoming the Mark Madden of message board posters. Just post some ridiculous nonsense like Pouncey's a wuss or Cam Newton sucks, and people will respond to the sheer absurdity of it all. You may get the attention you crave, but in the process might start to lose the respect of the knowledgable folks that know that you are better than the schtick that you are currently flinging (throwing out a random opinion then refusing to even consider any other even slightly different opinion, regardless of how much your point has been refuted).

Yeah we all know he can run but can he throw? Seems to be struggling with that overall.

Not sure why this is deemed as self serving or some kind of crackpot thread(?) Is it because I defended my argument?

Never called anyone names or personally attacked anyone. Hmmmm???

RuthlessBurgher

12-13-2011, 07:32 PM

[quote="Dee Dub":jn0izwy3]you gotta know most every thread I put out here whether it is right on or not, it's going to generate discussion.

Congratulations. You're becoming the Mark Madden of message board posters. Just post some ridiculous nonsense like Pouncey's a wuss or Cam Newton sucks, and people will respond to the sheer absurdity of it all. You may get the attention you crave, but in the process might start to lose the respect of the knowledgable folks that know that you are better than the schtick that you are currently flinging (throwing out a random opinion then refusing to even consider any other even slightly different opinion, regardless of how much your point has been refuted).

Really?? First of all these threads are my honest opinions. I would hardly say I am seeking attention for then. We all arent alike. And Ruthless does it really matter what people on a message board think of me? Or whether or not they respect me? Seriously? I dont come here for that. I come here to talk football and give/vent my opinion about it. Am I suppose to be trying to get inside of some cool car of guys on this board so i can be liked? I respect others on this forum because of who I am inside. The fact that I have given my life over to God. But I dont expect others to respect me just because of what I think about football.

Where did I ever say Cam Newton sucks? I just dont think he will ever make it in the league as a passer. Period.

But I get it. It's cool.[/quote:jn0izwy3]

I have read enough of your posts over the years to know you are knowledgeable about football. I respect that. You add to this board no doubt. But lately you have been spewing contrarian type opinions (which you are certainly entitled to do, but there seems to be a "shock jock" aspect to them now...maybe not to a Howard Stern degree or anything like that, but perhaps in line with the types of things that Mark Madden or Colin Cowherd might say, just because they know they'll be a line of people waiting to disagree with them). My intent is not to insult you or anything by saying this, just pointing out what I have noticed of late...no offense intended whatsoever. Carry on.

Dee Dub

12-13-2011, 07:32 PM

[quote="Dee Dub":wje5qzgx]

In this case, for this thread, no. Cam Newton has plenty of quality players to throw too.

OK, but in this very thread you said we couldn't/shouldn't compare Cam's rookie numbers to Terry Bradshaw's rookie numbers because of who Bradshaw was throwing to. Wow dude, you change your story so much you can't even keep it straight. In this thread you were making the case that WRs matter. In the other case you seemed to be making the opposite case.

Not going to address the rest of what you said because it is just plain nonsense.

I didnt bring up Bradshaw in this thread. Ruthless did. I just pointed who Bradshaw was throwing to in 1970.

What I think is...any comparison of Can Newton Terry Bradshaw is ridiculous. Whatever the comparison is too. We are talking about a 4 time super bowl champion to one I dont think will ever win any championships.

IIRC, Ruthless compared Bradshaw's rookie year to Newton's rookie season which seems legitimate enough. Anyway, it matters little who brought it up. Once it was brought up you chimed in with a list of his receivers which (seemingly) was an attempt to justify his low production that year.[/quote:wje5qzgx]

Before he did that I compared similar types of QB's to Cam Newton. Michael Vick, Randall Cunningham, Kordell Stewart. I thought they were viable comparisons as they are similar types of QB's.

Then Ruthless, decided to throw Bradshaw in my face not to prove a point but to attack me. Otherwise he wouldnt have felt the need to add "That's the guy who you say is unquestionably better than Tom Brady."

Dee Dub

12-13-2011, 07:38 PM

[quote="Dee Dub":3lndpuil]you gotta know most every thread I put out here whether it is right on or not, it's going to generate discussion.

Congratulations. You're becoming the Mark Madden of message board posters. Just post some ridiculous nonsense like Pouncey's a wuss or Cam Newton sucks, and people will respond to the sheer absurdity of it all. You may get the attention you crave, but in the process might start to lose the respect of the knowledgable folks that know that you are better than the schtick that you are currently flinging (throwing out a random opinion then refusing to even consider any other even slightly different opinion, regardless of how much your point has been refuted).

Really?? First of all these threads are my honest opinions. I would hardly say I am seeking attention for then. We all arent alike. And Ruthless does it really matter what people on a message board think of me? Or whether or not they respect me? Seriously? I dont come here for that. I come here to talk football and give/vent my opinion about it. Am I suppose to be trying to get inside of some cool car of guys on this board so i can be liked? I respect others on this forum because of who I am inside. The fact that I have given my life over to God. But I dont expect others to respect me just because of what I think about football.

Where did I ever say Cam Newton sucks? I just dont think he will ever make it in the league as a passer. Period.

But I get it. It's cool.

I have read enough of your posts over the years to know you are knowledgeable about football. I respect that. You add to this board no doubt. But lately you have been spewing contrarian type opinions (which you are certainly entitled to do, but there seems to be a "shock jock" aspect to them now...maybe not to a Howard Stern degree or anything like that, but perhaps in line with the types of things that Mark Madden or Colin Cowherd might say, just because they know they'll be a line of people waiting to disagree with them). My intent is not to insult you or anything by saying this, just pointing out what I have noticed of late...no offense intended whatsoever. Carry on.[/quote:3lndpuil]

I dont see how you can read my thread post here and come away with that (?). There was a poster on this forum who said at the beginning of the season they would rather have Cam Newton over Ben Roethlisberger. I think that this is a valid post to show that Cam Newton isnt the same Cam Newton as he was at the time the comment was made.

I think this thread was more to prove a point than to get shock value. But hey..if that is how you see me then so be it. It doesn't matter. But if you are a moderator..which I think you are??....I would expect a little more from you. And if you are can you please remind some about the rules of conduct?

Thanks.

Peace.

RuthlessBurgher

12-13-2011, 07:41 PM

[quote=snarky][quote="Dee Dub":1ulwzgye]

In this case, for this thread, no. Cam Newton has plenty of quality players to throw too.

OK, but in this very thread you said we couldn't/shouldn't compare Cam's rookie numbers to Terry Bradshaw's rookie numbers because of who Bradshaw was throwing to. Wow dude, you change your story so much you can't even keep it straight. In this thread you were making the case that WRs matter. In the other case you seemed to be making the opposite case.

Not going to address the rest of what you said because it is just plain nonsense.

I didnt bring up Bradshaw in this thread. Ruthless did. I just pointed who Bradshaw was throwing to in 1970.

What I think is...any comparison of Can Newton Terry Bradshaw is ridiculous. Whatever the comparison is too. We are talking about a 4 time super bowl champion to one I dont think will ever win any championships.

IIRC, Ruthless compared Bradshaw's rookie year to Newton's rookie season which seems legitimate enough. Anyway, it matters little who brought it up. Once it was brought up you chimed in with a list of his receivers which (seemingly) was an attempt to justify his low production that year.[/quote:1ulwzgye]

Before he did that I compared similar types of QB's to Cam Newton. Michael Vick, Randall Cunningham, Kordell Stewart. I thought they were viable comparisons as they are similar types of QB's.

Then Ruthless, decided to throw Bradshaw in my face not to prove a point but to attack me. Otherwise he wouldnt have felt the need to add "That's the guy who you say is unquestionably better than Tom Brady."[/quote:1ulwzgye]

That's attacking? You are condemning a rookie QB because he throws more INT's than TD's and has a low completion percentage. Then you gave some other examples of guys who also threw more INT's than TD's and had a low completion percentages rookies, pointing out that these guys never won championships. So, I provided another example of a rookie QB who did go on to win championships in spite of throwing more INT's than TD's and having a low completion percentage as a rookie. The fact that you just happened to declare Bradshaw as unquestionably better than Brady just a few short days ago just allowed me to tie it all together with a nice little bow. I'm not attacking you...you can throw out stats to defend your opinion, and I can throw out stats to defend mine.

Dee Dub

12-13-2011, 07:52 PM

That's attacking? You are condemning a rookie QB because he throws more INT's than TD's and has a low completion percentage. Then you gave some other examples of guys who also threw more INT's than TD's and had a low completion percentages rookies, pointing out that these guys never won championships. So, I provided another example of a rookie QB who did go on to win championships in spite of throwing more INT's than TD's and having a low completion percentage as a rookie. The fact that you just happened to declare Bradshaw as unquestionably better than Brady just a few short days ago just allowed me to tie it all together with a nice little bow. I'm not attacking you...you can throw out stats to defend your opinion, and I can throw out stats to defend mine.

Well that's a little hard to see when you throw the jab at the end...but ok. It's all good.

RuthlessBurgher

12-13-2011, 08:06 PM

I dont see how you can read my thread post here and come away with that (?). There was a poster on this forum who said at the beginning of the season they would rather have Cam Newton over Ben Roethlisberger. I think that this is a valid post to show that Cam Newton isnt the same Cam Newton as he was at the time the comment was made.

I think this thread was more to prove a point than to get shock value. But hey..if that is how you see me then so be it. It doesn't matter. But if you are a moderator..which I think you are??....I would expect a little more from you. And if you are can you please remind some about the rules of conduct?

Thanks.

Peace.

I agree that Cam Newton is no Ben Roethlisberger. But I'd take him over, say, Mark Sanchez or Joe Flacco, a couple of other guys who were drafted high in recent years. Put Newton on the Jets or Ravens, and put Sanchez or Flacco on the Panthers, and I think you might see some Louis Winthorpe III/Billy Ray Valentine parallels.

You may or may not be making such posts of late with the sole intention of grabbing attention (although you did seem awfully proud of yourself when mentioning how much discussion your threads were generating), it was merely an observation I made. Take it however you want to take it. I have done something similar with another poster on the board a little while ago, pointing out how I've noticed his posting style has changed of late (not in a malicious way to degrade someone, but pointing out something I had seen lately to someone whose football opinions I respect, and I don't think it resulted in any ill will between us...I hope this doesn't either). If you were some anonymous schmoe who didn't add anything to the board, I wouldn't have even bothered to waste my time pointing anything out...hopefully that means something.

Lastly, do you seriously want me to formally warn someone because they called you a fool in a post? Seriously? I will, since that is what a moderator should do according to the strict letter of the Code of Conduct, but really? It's not like someone called you a douchebag or anything. Hines Ward calls Brett Keisel a fool in a Head & Shoulders commercial...it isn't exactly scathing degradation there.

RuthlessBurgher

12-13-2011, 08:07 PM

That's attacking? You are condemning a rookie QB because he throws more INT's than TD's and has a low completion percentage. Then you gave some other examples of guys who also threw more INT's than TD's and had a low completion percentages rookies, pointing out that these guys never won championships. So, I provided another example of a rookie QB who did go on to win championships in spite of throwing more INT's than TD's and having a low completion percentage as a rookie. The fact that you just happened to declare Bradshaw as unquestionably better than Brady just a few short days ago just allowed me to tie it all together with a nice little bow. I'm not attacking you...you can throw out stats to defend your opinion, and I can throw out stats to defend mine.

Well that's a little hard to see when you throw the jab at the end...but ok. It's all good.

Jabs at the end are what makes things fun around here. That one was too easy. You threw me a softball there. :wink:

Dee Dub

12-13-2011, 08:40 PM

....You may or may not be making such posts of late with the sole intention of grabbing attention (although you did seem awfully proud of yourself when mentioning how much discussion your threads were generating)....

That is what you got out of that?

Dude most of these poster are against me here. So how could that be about patting myself on the back? If anything it was a knock at myself.

I an assure you when I made this comment...

Dee Dub wrote:
you gotta know most every thread I put out here whether it is right on or not, it's going to generate discussion.

...it was a far from patting myself on the back as could be.

:roll:

Dee Dub

12-13-2011, 08:45 PM

Jabs at the end are what makes things fun around here. That one was too easy. You threw me a softball there. :wink:

..and that's how I saw this..

7 pages of discussion on Cam Newton??? :shock: :)

you gotta know most every thread I put out here whether it is right on or not, it's going to generate discussion.

snarky

12-13-2011, 11:20 PM

[quote=snarky][quote="Dee Dub":3piqpdpv]

In this case, for this thread, no. Cam Newton has plenty of quality players to throw too.

OK, but in this very thread you said we couldn't/shouldn't compare Cam's rookie numbers to Terry Bradshaw's rookie numbers because of who Bradshaw was throwing to. Wow dude, you change your story so much you can't even keep it straight. In this thread you were making the case that WRs matter. In the other case you seemed to be making the opposite case.

Not going to address the rest of what you said because it is just plain nonsense.

I didnt bring up Bradshaw in this thread. Ruthless did. I just pointed who Bradshaw was throwing to in 1970.

What I think is...any comparison of Can Newton Terry Bradshaw is ridiculous. Whatever the comparison is too. We are talking about a 4 time super bowl champion to one I dont think will ever win any championships.

IIRC, Ruthless compared Bradshaw's rookie year to Newton's rookie season which seems legitimate enough. Anyway, it matters little who brought it up. Once it was brought up you chimed in with a list of his receivers which (seemingly) was an attempt to justify his low production that year.[/quote:3piqpdpv]

Before he did that I compared similar types of QB's to Cam Newton. Michael Vick, Randall Cunningham, Kordell Stewart. I thought they were viable comparisons as they are similar types of QB's.

Then Ruthless, decided to throw Bradshaw in my face not to prove a point but to attack me. Otherwise he wouldnt have felt the need to add "That's the guy who you say is unquestionably better than Tom Brady."[/quote:3piqpdpv]

I'm not going to get into a debate over what Ruthless's motives were. But the fact remains that a comparison was made between QBs and you threw out one of the QBs receiving corps to excuse his poor numbers. And I guess I'm just curious why Frenchy Fuqua et al are relevant to Bradshaw but David Patten et al are not relevant to Brady.

feltdizz

12-14-2011, 12:46 AM

I dont see how you can read my thread post here and come away with that (?). There was a poster on this forum who said at the beginning of the season they would rather have Cam Newton over Ben Roethlisberger. I think that this is a valid post to show that Cam Newton isnt the same Cam Newton as he was at the time the comment was made.

I think this thread was more to prove a point than to get shock value. But hey..if that is how you see me then so be it. It doesn't matter. But if you are a moderator..which I think you are??....I would expect a little more from you. And if you are can you please remind some about the rules of conduct?

Thanks.

Peace.

I agree that Cam Newton is no Ben Roethlisberger. But I'd take him over, say, Mark Sanchez or Joe Flacco, a couple of other guys who were drafted high in recent years. Put Newton on the Jets or Ravens, and put Sanchez or Flacco on the Panthers, and I think you might see some Louis Winthorpe III/Billy Ray Valentine parallels.

You may or may not be making such posts of late with the sole intention of grabbing attention (although you did seem awfully proud of yourself when mentioning how much discussion your threads were generating), it was merely an observation I made. Take it however you want to take it. I have done something similar with another poster on the board a little while ago, pointing out how I've noticed his posting style has changed of late (not in a malicious way to degrade someone, but pointing out something I had seen lately to someone whose football opinions I respect, and I don't think it resulted in any ill will between us...I hope this doesn't either). If you were some anonymous schmoe who didn't add anything to the board, I wouldn't have even bothered to waste my time pointing anything out...hopefully that means something.

Lastly, do you seriously want me to formally warn someone because they called you a fool in a post? Seriously? I will, since that is what a moderator should do according to the strict letter of the Code of Conduct, but really? It's not like someone called you a douchebag or anything. Hines Ward calls Brett Keisel a fool in a Head & Shoulders commercial...it isn't exactly scathing degradation there.

:loser
:D

Dee Dub

12-14-2011, 08:23 PM

16 INT's (more than TD's) in 13 games, and a completion percentage of 59.7%. That means Cam Newton isnt a very accurate passer. And in the NFL that is Paramount to being a successful QB.

But hey...he is an exciting runner isnt he? :stirpot

snarky

12-15-2011, 01:56 PM

16 INT's (more than TD's) in 13 games, and a completion percentage of 59.7%. That means Cam Newton isnt a very accurate passer. And in the NFL that is Paramount to being a successful QB.

But hey...he is an exciting runner isnt he? :stirpot

I think it's safe to say that there are some TDs coming off his passing stats simply because he is able to run the ball into the EZ. In other words, you can only accumulate one TD or INT per drive and the fact that he is able to run the ball in for a score when they are in the red zone means they are passing less than they would if he was a traditional pocket passer. Given that, I think the 15/16 ratio is more than acceptable.

16 INT's (more than TD's) in 13 games, and a completion percentage of 59.7%. That means Cam Newton isnt a very accurate passer. And in the NFL that is Paramount to being a successful QB.

But hey...he is an exciting runner isnt he? :stirpot

I think it's safe to say that there are some TDs coming off his passing stats simply because he is able to run the ball into the EZ. In other words, you can only accumulate one TD or INT per drive and the fact that he is able to run the ball in for a score when they are in the red zone means they are passing less than they would if he was a traditional pocket passer. Given that, I think the 15/16 ratio is more than acceptable.

I would agree with that to a point. But as I have pointed out, running QB (those who run as much as Newton, Vick, Cunningham, Stewart), have not had success in the NFL in regards to winning championships.

Those are traditional pocket passers. I dont think they are viable comparisons to who Cam Newton is. That is why I had the comparisons of Vick, Cunningham, and Stewart. He is more them than he is Peyton Manning, Sam Bradford, and Matt Ryan.

snarky

12-15-2011, 03:19 PM

[quote="Dee Dub":15suwhhp]16 INT's (more than TD's) in 13 games, and a completion percentage of 59.7%. That means Cam Newton isnt a very accurate passer. And in the NFL that is Paramount to being a successful QB.

But hey...he is an exciting runner isnt he? :stirpot

I think it's safe to say that there are some TDs coming off his passing stats simply because he is able to run the ball into the EZ. In other words, you can only accumulate one TD or INT per drive and the fact that he is able to run the ball in for a score when they are in the red zone means they are passing less than they would if he was a traditional pocket passer. Given that, I think the 15/16 ratio is more than acceptable.

I would agree with that to a point. But as I have pointed out, running QB (those who run as much as Newton, Vick, Cunningham, Stewart), have not had success in the NFL in regards to winning championships.

Those are traditional pocket passers. I dont think they are viable comparisons to who Cam Newton is. That is why I had the comparisons of Vick, Cunningham, and Stewart. He is more them than he is Peyton Manning, Sam Bradford, and Matt Ryan.[/quote:15suwhhp]

I guess my point is that his rookie completion percentage compares favorably to pretty much every true rookie QB in the history of the league who has been asked to throw the ball as much as he has. Take away the tag of a running QB or pocket QB

In fact, if Newton throws for at least 132 yards this week, he will have more yards in his first 14 games than the career highs for Vick, Cunningham and Stewart. And his rookie completion percentage is at least 3 points higher than any of them achieved in their first year as a starter.

He might be a quarterback that can run as well as those other guys, but so far it looks like his passing is superior.

Dee Dub

12-15-2011, 03:50 PM

[quote="Dee Dub":13awyhm2]16 INT's (more than TD's) in 13 games, and a completion percentage of 59.7%. That means Cam Newton isnt a very accurate passer. And in the NFL that is Paramount to being a successful QB.

But hey...he is an exciting runner isnt he? :stirpot

I think it's safe to say that there are some TDs coming off his passing stats simply because he is able to run the ball into the EZ. In other words, you can only accumulate one TD or INT per drive and the fact that he is able to run the ball in for a score when they are in the red zone means they are passing less than they would if he was a traditional pocket passer. Given that, I think the 15/16 ratio is more than acceptable.

I would agree with that to a point. But as I have pointed out, running QB (those who run as much as Newton, Vick, Cunningham, Stewart), have not had success in the NFL in regards to winning championships.

Those are traditional pocket passers. I dont think they are viable comparisons to who Cam Newton is. That is why I had the comparisons of Vick, Cunningham, and Stewart. He is more them than he is Peyton Manning, Sam Bradford, and Matt Ryan.

I guess my point is that his rookie completion percentage compares favorably to pretty much every true rookie QB in the history of the league who has been asked to throw the ball as much as he has. Take away the tag of a running QB or pocket QB

In fact, if Newton throws for at least 132 yards this week, he will have more yards in his first 14 games than the career highs for Vick, Cunningham and Stewart. And his rookie completion percentage is at least 3 points higher than any of them achieved in their first year as a starter.

He might be a quarterback that can run as well as those other guys, but so far it looks like his passing is superior.[/quote:13awyhm2]

I dint use Vickís and Cunninghamís rookie stats. I used their career stats. The point I am trying to make is just like them, in my opinion, Cam Newton will never develop into a great passer.

But if you want to use comparable rookie stats to a similar type of QB then use Kordell Stewart's first year as a starting QB. And Kordell never developed into an above average passer.

3020 passing yards, 21 TD's, 17 INT's, 53.6% completion percentage, 476 yards rushing and 11 TD's rushing. At that time Kordell looked as if his future was bright. As if the Steelers hit on the next great QB.

He was more effective with his legs than his arm early in his career, but turned things around from a crappy completion percentage and more INT's than TD's early in his career and became a Super Bowl winning QB (throwing 6 TD passes in his Super Bowl victory) and ultimately a Hall of Fame QB. Sure, it helped that he moved from the awful Bucs to a significantly better 49er team, but it goes to show that scrambling QB's can become championship-level passers...they are doomed by having poor completion percentages and more interceptions than touchdown passes early in their careers.

feltdizz

12-15-2011, 05:13 PM

I dint use Vickís and Cunninghamís rookie stats. I used their career stats. The point I am trying to make is just like them, in my opinion, Cam Newton will never develop into a great passer.

But if you want to use comparable rookie stats to a similar type of QB then use Kordell Stewart's first year as a starting QB. And Kordell never developed into an above average passer.

3020 passing yards, 21 TD's, 17 INT's, 53.6% completion percentage, 476 yards rushing and 11 TD's rushing. At that time Kordell looked as if his future was bright. As if the Steelers hit on the next great QB.

Rest of his career? 56 TD's passing and 67 INT's.

Your back has to hurt from moving the goal post around so much.

How many OC's did Stewart have while QB? He was blamed for the AFCCG loss to the Pats in a game that had a blocked FG for a TD and a punt return for a TD.

Why not use all the rookie QB's you mentioned instead of using Kordell who was once blasted by his OC after running for a TD instead of throwing the ball?

Cam is so far ahead of Stewart as a passer it's not even funny.

snarky

12-15-2011, 05:23 PM

Doing a little research shows that the whole "more INTs than TDs" matters little in a guy's rookie year. Here's a list (incomplete) that threw more INTs than TDs their first season as starter

He was more effective with his legs than his arm early in his career, but turned things around from a crappy completion percentage and more INT's than TD's early in his career and became a Super Bowl winning QB (throwing 6 TD passes in his Super Bowl victory) and ultimately a Hall of Fame QB. Sure, it helped that he moved from the awful Bucs to a significantly better 49er team, but it goes to show that scrambling QB's can become championship-level passers...they are doomed by having poor completion percentages and more interceptions than touchdown passes early in their careers.

It took 9 pages for someone to bring up Steve Young. :roll: He has always been a throw first QB. Before he played in Tampa Bay he lit it up at BYU. Two years as the starting QB he threw for over 7,000 yards. He ran when he had too but he was a thrower from day one.

Dee Dub

12-15-2011, 05:34 PM

Doing a little research shows that the whole "more INTs than TDs" matters little in a guy's rookie year. Here's a list (incomplete) that threw more INTs than TDs their first season as starter

Again, pocket passers who relied on their arms first. Not the other way around.

Show me the opposite and how many rings are on that list.

Dee Dub

12-15-2011, 05:39 PM

I dint use Vickís and Cunninghamís rookie stats. I used their career stats. The point I am trying to make is just like them, in my opinion, Cam Newton will never develop into a great passer.

But if you want to use comparable rookie stats to a similar type of QB then use Kordell Stewart's first year as a starting QB. And Kordell never developed into an above average passer.

3020 passing yards, 21 TD's, 17 INT's, 53.6% completion percentage, 476 yards rushing and 11 TD's rushing. At that time Kordell looked as if his future was bright. As if the Steelers hit on the next great QB.

Rest of his career? 56 TD's passing and 67 INT's.

Your back has to hurt from moving the goal post around so much.

How many OC's did Stewart have while QB? He was blamed for the AFCCG loss to the Pats in a game that had a blocked FG for a TD and a punt return for a TD.

Why not use all the rookie QB's you mentioned instead of using Kordell who was once blasted by his OC after running for a TD instead of throwing the ball?

Cam is so far ahead of Stewart as a passer it's not even funny.

Ok use Vick and Cunningham's rookie years. It doenst matter. Still proves my point. Those type of QB's dont have great success long term as passers nor do they win championships.

I used their careers to show how they ended up. But Vick and Cunningham had some success but in the overall picture of great passing QB's, where are they on that list? Not even top 50 all time. And ya boy Cam wont sniff that either when it's said and done. My opinion.

snarky

12-15-2011, 05:48 PM

Doing a little research shows that the whole "more INTs than TDs" matters little in a guy's rookie year. Here's a list (incomplete) that threw more INTs than TDs their first season as starter

Again, pocket passers who relied on their arms first. Not the other way around.

Show me the opposite and how many rings are on that list.

On one hand I can see what you are saying. But on the other hand, it seems like all you are doing is penalizing the guy for being able to run. Even as a pure passer he is having a great rookie season (throw out his running numbers). So I guess your argument is that running QBs get 'figured out' after their first season. But other than Stewart, I don't know how many example you have.

Dee Dub

12-15-2011, 05:54 PM

On one hand I can see what you are saying.

It only took you 9 pages of this thread to come to that. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

But on the other hand, it seems like all you are doing is penalizing the guy for being able to run. Even as a pure passer he is having a great rookie season (throw out his running numbers). So I guess your argument is that running QBs get 'figured out' after their first season. But other than Stewart, I don't know how many example you have.

Not at all. I am penalizing him (as you put it), for his lack of ability to throw the ball with an above average amount of accuracy.

I hope it doesnt take another 9 pages for you to see that. :wink:

snarky

12-15-2011, 06:02 PM

On one hand I can see what you are saying.

It only took you 9 pages of this thread to come to that. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

But on the other hand, it seems like all you are doing is penalizing the guy for being able to run. Even as a pure passer he is having a great rookie season (throw out his running numbers). So I guess your argument is that running QBs get 'figured out' after their first season. But other than Stewart, I don't know how many example you have.

Not at all. I am penalizing him (as you put it), for his lack of ability to throw the ball with an above average amount of accuracy.

I hope it doesnt take another 9 pages for you to see that. :wink:

But when you compare him to other true rookies he is way above average in terms of completion %, so you are operating on a false premise. As I posted earlier, only three other true rookies have passed for over 3000 yards and had a completion % greater than or equal to 55.

Dee Dub

12-15-2011, 06:15 PM

On one hand I can see what you are saying.

It only took you 9 pages of this thread to come to that. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

But on the other hand, it seems like all you are doing is penalizing the guy for being able to run. Even as a pure passer he is having a great rookie season (throw out his running numbers). So I guess your argument is that running QBs get 'figured out' after their first season. But other than Stewart, I don't know how many example you have.

Not at all. I am penalizing him (as you put it), for his lack of ability to throw the ball with an above average amount of accuracy.

I hope it doesnt take another 9 pages for you to see that. :wink:

But when you compare him to other true rookies he is way above average in terms of completion %, so you are operating on a false premise. As I posted earlier, only three other true rookies have passed for over 3000 yards and had a completion % greater than or equal to 55.

Maybe you should go back and read this thread again?? I think in your desire to prove me wrong you have not really understood what it is I am actually saying about Cam Newton. And no offense by that. I've done that myself.

I think because of Cam Newton's natural athletic instincts (run when things break down), is below accurate passing skills, and his less than desirable decision making ability, he will never develop as an above average passer.

If you add these things up they dont equate to a bonafide passer. You cant run yourself to a championship in the NFL as a passer. I believe his development will be hindered because of his strength as a runner. And when teams sell out to stop or at least control his running some, his passing numbers will suffer even more. And I dont think when that happens you will see many 400 yard passing games.

feltdizz

12-15-2011, 08:19 PM

Dub you clearly haven't watched Cam this year. Cam isn't taking off when things break down and some say he should tuck it and run more often due to the suspect line play. Most of Cam's runs are designed runs, especially inside the 10 in the redzone.

I know you have this theory based on nothing more than an opinion but I think you are wrong on this one. Will he win a SB? I doubt it but he will be a solid QB and the FO doesn't have to worry about the QB position for a while.

Everyone thought Sam Bradford would be further along then he is given his rookie year. You never know who will pan out at QB but Cam hasn't given any indication that he has hit the ceiling as a passer.

RuthlessBurgher

12-15-2011, 08:19 PM

You do realize that "run-first, pass-second" Cam Newton has more passing yards through 13 games than God's gift to quarterbacking, Ben Roethlisberger (3573 vs. 3526). Cam has also accounted for more TD's than Ben (28 vs. 21). Sure, 13 of Cam's TD's came on the ground rather than through the air, but isn't it the job of the QB, the leader of the offense on the field, to score touchdowns, regardless of how the ball gets in the end zone? The Steelers high powered offense with a two-time Super Bowl champion at the helm (plus big time weapons like Wallace and Brown and Sanders and Ward and Cotchery and Miller and Saunders and Johnson and Mendenhall and Redman and Moore) has scored 282 points this season, while the Panthers sucktastic offense led by rookie who is a better runner than a thrower (with Steve Smith, Legadu Naanee, Brandon LaFell, Seyi Ajirotutu, Armanti Edwards, Greg Olsen, Jeremy Shockey, Richie Brockel, DeAngelo Williams, Jonathan Stewart, and Mike Goodson) has scored 313 points this season. I'm not saying that Cam is better than Ben...far from it. But for someone who probably already knows Ben's sportjacket measurements for his Hall of Fame blazer, and has already thrown Newton onto the Island of Misfit Athletic Quarterbacks, you gotta admit that those stats are pretty remarkable, no?

Dee Dub

12-15-2011, 09:24 PM

Felt, Ruthless....this is what I know. 59.8% completion percentage, 16 INT's and a 4-9 record.

Sorry fellows nothing you can say is going to change that nor my opinion of Cam Newton. And those numbers help my opinion more than your opinion about Caaaaaaaaaaaaaaaam!!

snarky

12-15-2011, 11:01 PM

And those numbers help my opinion more than your opinion about Caaaaaaaaaaaaaaaam!!

This in itself is simply your opinion and it's wrong. :lol:

Captain Lemming

12-16-2011, 12:23 AM

Felt, Ruthless....this is what I know. 59.8% completion percentage, 16 INT's and a 4-9 record.

Sorry fellows nothing you can say is going to change that nor my opinion of Cam Newton. And those numbers help my opinion more than your opinion about Caaaaaaaaaaaaaaaam!!

Dee how many true number one pick QBs (these end up on the leagues worst team) have better numbers than those you just posted?

snarky

12-16-2011, 12:45 AM

[quote="Dee Dub":2ykgwauw]Felt, Ruthless....this is what I know. 59.8% completion percentage, 16 INT's and a 4-9 record.

Sorry fellows nothing you can say is going to change that nor my opinion of Cam Newton. And those numbers help my opinion more than your opinion about Caaaaaaaaaaaaaaaam!!

Dee how many true number one pick QBs (these end up on the leagues worst team) have better numbers than those you just posted?[/quote:2ykgwauw]

Here are the numbers for every true rookie ever drafted in the first round (with at least 1000 yards in passing).

You do realize that "run-first, pass-second" Cam Newton has more passing yards through 13 games than God's gift to quarterbacking, Ben Roethlisberger (3573 vs. 3526). Cam has also accounted for more TD's than Ben (28 vs. 21). Sure, 13 of Cam's TD's came on the ground rather than through the air, but isn't it the job of the QB, the leader of the offense on the field, to score touchdowns, regardless of how the ball gets in the end zone? The Steelers high powered offense with a two-time Super Bowl champion at the helm (plus big time weapons like Wallace and Brown and Sanders and Ward and Cotchery and Miller and Saunders and Johnson and Mendenhall and Redman and Moore) has scored 282 points this season, while the Panthers sucktastic offense led by rookie who is a better runner than a thrower (with Steve Smith, Legadu Naanee, Brandon LaFell, Seyi Ajirotutu, Armanti Edwards, Greg Olsen, Jeremy Shockey, Richie Brockel, DeAngelo Williams, Jonathan Stewart, and Mike Goodson) has scored 313 points this season. I'm not saying that Cam is better than Ben...far from it. But for someone who probably already knows Ben's sportjacket measurements for his Hall of Fame blazer, and has already thrown Newton onto the Island of Misfit Athletic Quarterbacks, you gotta admit that those stats are pretty remarkable, no?

The entire Carolina line should be inducted in the HoF immediately if 'bail at the first sign of trouble' Cam Newton throws for 4300 yards.

feltdizz

12-16-2011, 10:40 AM

Kordell didn't get better... this is all the proof one needs to know Cam will fail.

flippy

12-16-2011, 10:59 AM

12 of Cam's 16 Ints came in 4 games against ATL, Detroit, and GB. Mistakes are gonna happen for any rookie QB.

I don't see how you can knock this kid. All he's been is fantastic and way better than expected as a rookie. Carolina can't play defense or they'd be more competitive.

And not only can he run, his YPA is a respectable 7.9 so he's effectively moving the ball down the field.

Give the man some time. By all accounts, he's a great kid. Performing way better than most expected. And in time, Carolina will be a major force in the NFC if they improve their D.

steelblood

12-16-2011, 11:09 AM

What I don't understand is why some people don't give Cam a chance to develop into a better (championship quality) pocket passer? He has everything he needs. He has a gun. He has the intelligence. He is already having some success in a simplified offense at the pro level. Why can't he become better at going through his progressions and improve his timing/anticipation? Why are you trying to write him off now? What is the point?

Dee Dub

12-16-2011, 02:16 PM

I am not knocking Cam Newton the player. He is a phenomenal athlete. I am knocking him as a passer.

He's not very good at it and I think instead of getting better in time he might possibly get worse.

feltdizz

12-16-2011, 02:20 PM

What I don't understand is why some people don't give Cam a chance to develop into a better (championship quality) pocket passer? He has everything he needs. He has a gun. He has the intelligence. He is already having some success in a simplified offense at the pro level. Why can't he become better at going through his progressions and improve his timing/anticipation? Why are you trying to write him off now? What is the point?

Kordell Stewart...

I thought you knew. :lol:

Actually, Dub likes to state his predictions as fact and then every so often he gets to pat himself on the back and tell everyone he was right.

When he is wrong though... well, he doesn't like to admit that or pat himself on the back for those predictions.

Cam Newton is a lightning rod just like Tim Tebow... you either like 'em or you don't. I'm not a big Tebow fan but I can admit he is a good football player. Still not convinced he is a good passer but there are actual stats or lack there of to back it up.

If Cam was 3 of 10 through 3 quarters but his team was 9-4 people would still bash his arm and rightfully so. Now sure how being 4-9 on a team that was 2-14 the year before with a first time HC, new OC and more INT's then TD's means Cam won't improve but hey...

KORDELL STEWART!!!

Dee Dub

12-16-2011, 02:53 PM

What I don't understand is why some people don't give Cam a chance to develop into a better (championship quality) pocket passer? He has everything he needs. He has a gun. He has the intelligence. He is already having some success in a simplified offense at the pro level. Why can't he become better at going through his progressions and improve his timing/anticipation? Why are you trying to write him off now? What is the point?

Kordell Stewart...

I thought you knew. :lol:

Actually, Dub likes to state his predictions as fact and then every so often he gets to pat himself on the back and tell everyone he was right.

When he is wrong though... well, he doesn't like to admit that or pat himself on the back for those predictions.

Cam Newton is a lightning rod just like Tim Tebow... you either like 'em or you don't. I'm not a big Tebow fan but I can admit he is a good football player. Still not convinced he is a good passer but there are actual stats or lack there of to back it up.

If Cam was 3 of 10 through 3 quarters but his team was 9-4 people would still bash his arm and rightfully so. Now sure how being 4-9 on a team that was 2-14 the year before with a first time HC, new OC and more INT's then TD's means Cam won't improve but hey...

KORDELL STEWART!!!

Ridiculous! What I think Cam will be in the future is simply my opinion...not fact. That would be impossible. The facts are the numbers Cam has put up...59.8% completion percentage, 16 INT's (13 games), and a QBR of 81.1. That is the only facts I have said in this thread. And those facts are true.

And I have admitted many times on this forum and the Trib that I was wrong. Especially since I gave my life over to Christ. It's not that hard when you are free.

But felt, if you makes you feel like a man to twist what others say or paint some one in a light that makes them look bad...have at it.

God is good...all the time.

Dee Dub

12-16-2011, 02:59 PM

Actually, Dub likes to state his predictions as fact and then every so often he gets to pat himself on the back and tell everyone he was right.

When he is wrong though... well, he doesn't like to admit that or pat himself on the back for those predictions.

And by the way...it's comments like you just made (character assassinations), that make a person want to pound their chest when they are right. :idea:

feltdizz

12-16-2011, 03:49 PM

Actually, Dub likes to state his predictions as fact and then every so often he gets to pat himself on the back and tell everyone he was right.

When he is wrong though... well, he doesn't like to admit that or pat himself on the back for those predictions.

And by the way...it's comments like you just made (character assassinations), that make a person want to pound their chest when they are right. :idea:

There you go with the God talk again. Anytime someone jokes you are comes at you in a thread you start this God talk.

I'm not assassinating you, I'm joking you.

You really need to lighten up, you had to know pointing out Kordell Stewart as the reason Cam will fail is easy money on here.

Don't take yourself too seriously because we don't. :Cheers

and God is good... all the time, Jesus turned water.. into wine.

Dee Dub

12-16-2011, 05:36 PM

Actually, Dub likes to state his predictions as fact and then every so often he gets to pat himself on the back and tell everyone he was right.

When he is wrong though... well, he doesn't like to admit that or pat himself on the back for those predictions.

And by the way...it's comments like you just made (character assassinations), that make a person want to pound their chest when they are right. :idea:

There you go with the God talk again. Anytime someone jokes you are comes at you in a thread you start this God talk.

I'm not assassinating you, I'm joking you.

You really need to lighten up, you had to know pointing out Kordell Stewart as the reason Cam will fail is easy money on here.

Don't take yourself too seriously because we don't. :Cheers

and God is good... all the time, Jesus turned water.. into wine.

Funny, I didnt see any smiley faces or laughing emoticons or any J/K's.

It's ok felt. You like to say things then turn around and act as if you didnt say it. But cool. No problem. I am not ashamed of God and will tell it like I feel it. Sorry if God makes you feel uncomfortable.

And Never did I say Kordell Stewart was the reason why Cam Newton will fail. I simply compared their rookie years because they (rookie years), are similar. Cam Newton will fail in my opinion because he is not good at throwing passes.

But that there is another one of your twisting what I actually said. :wink:

feltdizz

12-16-2011, 06:17 PM

No need to twist anything. We have 10 pages of you twisting things around and when you get exposed you bring up God.

God doesn't make me uncomfortable but it looks like any time you are uncomfortable you bring him into the discussion. Stick to football.

There are general discussions boards for God.

No one knows if Cam will fail but it looks like you are the only one who came to this conclusion based on Kordell and Cams stats this year.

Dee Dub

12-16-2011, 07:18 PM

No need to twist anything. We have 10 pages of you twisting things around and when you get exposed you bring up God.

God doesn't make me uncomfortable but it looks like any time you are uncomfortable you bring him into the discussion. Stick to football.

There are general discussions boards for God.

No one knows if Cam will fail but it looks like you are the only one who came to this conclusion based on Kordell and Cams stats this year.

Wow....that's what you take from what I had to say about God? Ok cool.

Again..it is Cam's numbers (no Kordell's), that lead me to believe he wont be a good passer in the NFL.

59.8%, 16 INT's (in 13 games), and a 81.1 QBR are below average numbers for passing in the NFL.

And again..one more time...this isnt me knowing the future. It is simply my opinion.

papillon

12-16-2011, 07:47 PM

My question about this whole thread is the following: Why does anyone care if Cam Newton comes back to earth or takes off like a spaceship? I will say this the media over hypes all these top quarterbacks and it does put a sour taste in your mouth about the player, because he hasn't taken a bloody snap in the NFL and you'd think they're all HOFers based on the media. So, while Newton, may be great or not, I was tired of hearing about him, just like Andrew Luck this year.

Pappy

Dee Dub

12-16-2011, 08:28 PM

My question about this whole thread is the following: Why does anyone care if Cam Newton comes back to earth or takes off like a spaceship? I will say this the media over hypes all these top quarterbacks and it does put a sour taste in your mouth about the player, because he hasn't taken a bloody snap in the NFL and you'd think they're all HOFers based on the media. So, while Newton, may be great or not, I was tired of hearing about him, just like Andrew Luck this year.

Pappy

Well for me, believe it or not, I really dont care whether he comes back to earth or takes off. Since you were here on this site early in the season then you should know how Ben Roethlisberger was attacked and heavily criticized for his early struggles. Some went as far as saying they would rather have Cam Newton instead. And I am sure you can remember how many where praising Newton early on as if he were the next great one. Well the tides have changed. Ben is playing some of the best ball of his life, and Cam Newton has well....come back to earth a little.

I got a little tired of hearing it to Pap. :wink:

I thought this would be a good thread to remember and remind.

Ben > Cam.....and will always be. :tt2

papillon

12-17-2011, 12:15 AM

My question about this whole thread is the following: Why does anyone care if Cam Newton comes back to earth or takes off like a spaceship? I will say this the media over hypes all these top quarterbacks and it does put a sour taste in your mouth about the player, because he hasn't taken a bloody snap in the NFL and you'd think they're all HOFers based on the media. So, while Newton, may be great or not, I was tired of hearing about him, just like Andrew Luck this year.

Pappy

Well for me, believe it or not, I really dont care whether he comes back to earth or takes off. Since you were here on this site early in the season then you should know how Ben Roethlisberger was attacked and heavily criticized for his early struggles. Some went as far as saying they would rather have Cam Newton instead. And I am sure you can remember how many where praising Newton early on as if he were the next great one. Well the tides have changed. Ben is playing some of the best ball of his life, and Cam Newton has well....come back to earth a little.

I got a little tired of hearing it to Pap. :wink:

I thought this would be a good thread to remember and remind.

Ben > Cam.....and will always be. :tt2

If I recall correctly it was one poster trying to stir the pot and saying he'd rather take Cam over Ben. Don't take it personally, he (or she) was trying to get under your skin. He (she) knew darn well Ben is the better quarterback and will be for the foreseeable future, but enjoyed stirring the pot.

Pappy

Captain Lemming

12-17-2011, 07:46 PM

[quote="Dee Dub":nojqbgw1]Felt, Ruthless....this is what I know. 59.8% completion percentage, 16 INT's and a 4-9 record.

Sorry fellows nothing you can say is going to change that nor my opinion of Cam Newton. And those numbers help my opinion more than your opinion about Caaaaaaaaaaaaaaaam!!

Dee how many true number one pick QBs (these end up on the leagues worst team) have better numbers than those you just posted?

Here are the numbers for every true rookie ever drafted in the first round (with at least 1000 yards in passing).

He was more effective with his legs than his arm early in his career, but turned things around from a crappy completion percentage and more INT's than TD's early in his career and became a Super Bowl winning QB (throwing 6 TD passes in his Super Bowl victory) and ultimately a Hall of Fame QB. Sure, it helped that he moved from the awful Bucs to a significantly better 49er team, but it goes to show that scrambling QB's can become championship-level passers...they are doomed by having poor completion percentages and more interceptions than touchdown passes early in their careers.

It took 9 pages for someone to bring up Steve Young. :roll: He has always been a throw first QB. Before he played in Tampa Bay he lit it up at BYU. Two years as the starting QB he threw for over 7,000 yards. He ran when he had too but he was a thrower from day one.

Steve Young played for the most pass happy offense this side of the run and shoot at BYU. He passed a lot in college, because that is what they do. I grew up in Hawaii and we saw them twice a year. Youngs "inclination" to take off is clear in that NO OTHER BYU QB DID THAT. Cunningham ALSO played Hawaii he was a pass first QB in college.

Young gained more yards rushing in as a college junior (641 yards) than the college career highs of Kordell or Randall Cunningham.

The comparison to Young IS valid. Young belongs in the conversation of runnig QBs. Young struggled as a rookie far more than Cam, and now is in the HOF.

The issue is not how well a QB can run. It is can he pass?
Back to Cam.
Do you know who has the higher passer rating in college of all these "running" QBs.
Cam Newton with a 182 QB rating. Higher than Steve Young. Or traditional guys like Peyton, or Elway, or Ben, Brees, Rogers, or Marino.

Cam has the highest college QB passer rating of anybody in the league today.

Back to the NFL
ONLY BEN and Marino of ALL THE QBs I just named had a higher rookie passer rating than Cam does right now. Funny that you mention Ben for comparison. Ben was a FREAK as a rookie.

Unless, he gets hurt, Cam will be the most prolific rookie passer in NFL history, possibly by tommorow. His passer rating will be better than ANY HOF QB had as a rookie. He will account for the most total points as well.

He was more effective with his legs than his arm early in his career, but turned things around from a crappy completion percentage and more INT's than TD's early in his career and became a Super Bowl winning QB (throwing 6 TD passes in his Super Bowl victory) and ultimately a Hall of Fame QB. Sure, it helped that he moved from the awful Bucs to a significantly better 49er team, but it goes to show that scrambling QB's can become championship-level passers...they are doomed by having poor completion percentages and more interceptions than touchdown passes early in their careers.

It took 9 pages for someone to bring up Steve Young. :roll: He has always been a throw first QB. Before he played in Tampa Bay he lit it up at BYU. Two years as the starting QB he threw for over 7,000 yards. He ran when he had too but he was a thrower from day one.

Steve Young played for the most pass happy offense this side of the run and shoot at BYU. He passed a lot in college, because that is what they do. I grew up in Hawaii and we saw them twice a year. Youngs "inclination" to take off is clear in that NO OTHER BYU QB DID THAT. Cunningham ALSO played Hawaii he was a pass first QB in college.

Young gained more yards rushing in as a college junior (641 yards) than the college career highs of Kordell or Randall Cunningham.

The comparison to Young IS valid. Young belongs in the conversation of runnig QBs. Young struggled as a rookie far more than Cam, and now is in the HOF.

The issue is not how well a QB can run. It is can he pass?
Back to Cam.
Do you know who has the higher passer rating in college of all these "running" QBs.
Cam Newton with a 182 QB rating. Higher than Steve Young. Or traditional guys like Peyton, or Elway, or Ben, Brees, Rogers, or Marino.

Cam has the highest college QB passer rating of anybody in the league today.

Back to the NFL
ONLY BEN and Marino of ALL THE QBs I just named had a higher rookie passer rating than Cam does right now. Funny that you mention Ben for comparison. Ben was a FREAK as a rookie.

Unless, he gets hurt, Cam will be the most prolific rookie passer in NFL history, possibly by tommorow. His passer rating will be better than ANY HOF QB had as a rookie. He will account for the most total points as well.

Cam cant pass? Yeah, right. :D[/quote:21nmfc47]

I'm glad you come to this board. Beautiful statistical breakdown. You have destroyed DeeDub's nonsensical statements. But he still thinks he's the MAN.

Keyplay1

12-18-2011, 02:03 PM

Not surprised a bit in the huge interest in this thread.

When it was first posted early in the week I was going to reply about how interested in seeing this player I was and thought others would be too. Especially after the Panthers nearly upset the Packers early in the season. I was really PO'd at why the networks could not find a way to let us fans see for ourselves.

Well, unless there is a last minute change the Carolina Panthers are on TV in the Pittsburgh area vs the Houston Texans. Hmm! I suppose it would be nice to have Carolina knock off the current AFC #1 seed [I think] Texans. Certainly wouldn't hurt the Steelers I suppose.

feltdizz

12-18-2011, 03:41 PM

What you are seeing today is what I have watched all year in Charlotte. Does anyone see a QB who bails easily or has problems passing the football?

This doesn't mean they will win because I've seen this 13 times this season. Carolina is a first half team but they have no idea how to adjust in the second half.

hawaiiansteel

12-18-2011, 03:48 PM

I have been impressed with Cam Newton every single time I have seen him play.

he is the clear winner of the Rookie of the Year Award, with Andy Dalton the runner-up.

Dee Dub

12-18-2011, 04:58 PM

Some of you guys are amazing. Where did I ever say all Cam does is run?

What I have said is as a passer to this point Cam Newton hasnt been very good. And I think in the long run, accuracy-wise, I think this is how he will always be. And I stand by that regardless of how many yards he throws for.

Dee Dub

12-18-2011, 05:02 PM

I'm glad you come to this board. Beautiful statistical breakdown. You have destroyed DeeDub's nonsensical statements. But he still thinks he's the MAN.

Really? Just because I have differing opinion? Why cant posters be a little more descent in their approach? Why does it have to turn to insults or attacks?

Dee Dub

12-18-2011, 05:05 PM

.....Dee the idea that this kid is just a runner is just ridiculous.

That is not what I said. But it doenst really matter. We shall see.

RuthlessBurgher

12-18-2011, 05:09 PM

Some of you guys are amazing. Where did I ever say all Cam does is run?

What I have said is as a passer to this point Cam Newton hasnt been very good. And I think in the long run, accuracy-wise, I think this is how he will always be. And I stand by that regardless of how many yards he throws for.

Outside of Marino and Roethlisberger, what rookie QB's have you consider to have been "very good" passers as rookies? Seems like Cam's rookie season as a passer only (even if you completely disregard the excellent job he has done running the ball) has surpassed essentially everyone else in NFL history, as Captain Lemming has so thoroughly described.

SteelAbility

12-18-2011, 05:46 PM

Some of you guys are amazing. Where did I ever say all Cam does is run?

What I have said is as a passer to this point Cam Newton hasnt been very good. And I think in the long run, accuracy-wise, I think this is how he will always be. And I stand by that regardless of how many yards he throws for.

Outside of Marino and Roethlisberger, what rookie QB's have you consider to have been "very good" passers as rookies? Seems like Cam's rookie season as a passer only (even if you completely disregard the excellent job he has done running the ball) has surpassed essentially everyone else in NFL history, as Captain Lemming has so thoroughly described.

They also flashed an interesting statistic during the HOU game today. Cam Newton leads the league in rushing 1st downs on 3rd-down.

RuthlessBurgher

12-18-2011, 05:57 PM

Some of you guys are amazing. Where did I ever say all Cam does is run?

What I have said is as a passer to this point Cam Newton hasnt been very good. And I think in the long run, accuracy-wise, I think this is how he will always be. And I stand by that regardless of how many yards he throws for.

Outside of Marino and Roethlisberger, what rookie QB's have you consider to have been "very good" passers as rookies? Seems like Cam's rookie season as a passer only (even if you completely disregard the excellent job he has done running the ball) has surpassed essentially everyone else in NFL history, as Captain Lemming has so thoroughly described.

They also flashed an interesting statistic during the HOU game today. Cam Newton leads the league in rushing 1st downs on 3rd-down.

And the only player with more rushing TD's than Cam this season is Shady McCoy (14 vs. 13).

snarky

12-18-2011, 07:03 PM

[quote="Captain Lemming":nqxhcgtw].....Dee the idea that this kid is just a runner is just ridiculous.

That is not what I said. But it doenst really matter. We shall see.[/quote:nqxhcgtw]

Coulda fooled me.

ng Team record 4-9
Yeah we all know he can run but can he throw? Seems to be struggling with that overall.

And him running the football doesnt impress me. He's a QB. If he is a better runner than a thrower what do you really have?

etc. etc. etc.

Captain Lemming

12-18-2011, 07:12 PM

Some of you guys are amazing. Where did I ever say all Cam does is run?

What I have said is as a passer to this point Cam Newton hasnt been very good. And I think in the long run, accuracy-wise, I think this is how he will always be. And I stand by that regardless of how many yards he throws for.

But I have given you unassailable evidence that Can HAS BEEN mores accurate as a rookie than some of the most accurate QBs in history. I showed you that Can has the highest QB effixiency rating as a college player of anyone in the NFL.

Dude just admit you had no clue that 59 percent that you thought was so horrid is ELITE for rookie QBs who are drafted by bad teams like Can was.
You looked at veteran QBs and ripped the kid. You know what Ben did and thought others are similar

Dee Dub

12-18-2011, 08:33 PM

[quote="Captain Lemming":3aipddca].....Dee the idea that this kid is just a runner is just ridiculous.

That is not what I said. But it doenst really matter. We shall see.

Coulda fooled me.

ng Team record 4-9
Yeah we all know he can run but can he throw? Seems to be struggling with that overall.

And him running the football doesnt impress me. He's a QB. If he is a better runner than a thrower what do you really have?

etc. etc. etc.[/quote:3aipddca]

snarky, could you at least be fair? Nothing here is a statment that I said "All he does is run".

Dee Dub

12-18-2011, 08:44 PM

[quote="Dee Dub":3buax3w8]Some of you guys are amazing. Where did I ever say all Cam does is run?

What I have said is as a passer to this point Cam Newton hasnt been very good. And I think in the long run, accuracy-wise, I think this is how he will always be. And I stand by that regardless of how many yards he throws for.

But I have given you unassailable evidence that Can HAS BEEN mores accurate as a rookie than some of the most accurate QBs in history. I showed you that Can has the highest QB effixiency rating as a college player of anyone in the NFL.

Dude just admit you had no clue that 59 percent that you thought was so horrid is ELITE for rookie QBs who are drafted by bad teams like Can was.
You looked at veteran QBs and ripped the kid. You know what Ben did and thought others are similar[/quote:3buax3w8]

If you read my threads from the beginning I compared Newton to what I think are similar QB's...Michael Vick and Randall Cunningham. I wasnt the one who brought up other QB's. To me other type of QB's are irrelivant to my point (opinion).

I think just like Vick and Cunningham, when it's all said and done, Cam Newton will again be like them. QB's who could run but werent known for being great passers. I believe teams will make adjustments over time versus him and he will struggle with adversary. And his in ability to be an accurate passer will be more prevelant.

But that is just my opinion. We will see.

And as far as the "You know what Ben did and thought that others were similar", comment, that is an incorrect. The only mention or thought I had about Ben was to point out how some had said they would take Cam over Ben at the beginning of this season. To compare Ben to Cam to me would be ridiculous. Just like Comparing Bradshaw to Cam I also think is ridiculous.

By the way if at some point in time (and that would be far from just his rookie year), where Cam proves me wrong, I sure wont have a hard time admitting I was wrong.

Captain Lemming

12-18-2011, 11:11 PM

[quote="Captain Lemming":179pka9l][quote="Dee Dub":179pka9l]Some of you guys are amazing. Where did I ever say all Cam does is run?

What I have said is as a passer to this point Cam Newton hasnt been very good. And I think in the long run, accuracy-wise, I think this is how he will always be. And I stand by that regardless of how many yards he throws for.

But I have given you unassailable evidence that Can HAS BEEN mores accurate as a rookie than some of the most accurate QBs in history. I showed you that Can has the highest QB effixiency rating as a college player of anyone in the NFL.

Dude just admit you had no clue that 59 percent that you thought was so horrid is ELITE for rookie QBs who are drafted by bad teams like Can was.
You looked at veteran QBs and ripped the kid. You know what Ben did and thought others are similar[/quote:179pka9l]

If you read my threads from the beginning I compared Newton to what I think are similar QB's...Michael Vick and Randall Cunningham. I wasnt the one who brought up other QB's. To me other type of QB's are irrelivant to my point (opinion).

I think just like Vick and Cunningham, when it's all said and done, Cam Newton will again be like them. QB's who could run but werent known for being great passers. I believe teams will make adjustments over time versus him and he will struggle with adversary. And his in ability to be an accurate passer will be more prevelant.

But that is just my opinion. We will see.

And as far as the "You know what Ben did and thought that others were similar", comment, that is an incorrect. The only mention or thought I had about Ben was to point out how some had said they would take Cam over Ben at the beginning of this season. To compare Ben to Cam to me would be ridiculous. Just like Comparing Bradshaw to Cam I also think is ridiculous.

By the way if at some point in time (and that would be far from just his rookie year), where Cam proves me wrong, I sure wont have a hard time admitting I was wrong.[/quote:179pka9l]

The problem with your "logic" is that you judge Cam as a passer based on how well he "runs". That makes zero sense. You lump him in with other QBs who could run regardless of how their skills as a passers compare.

Now you say we cannot compare him AS A PASSER to guys who cannot run, because they are a "different kind" of QB?

You cannot wave around a 59 percent pass percentage like it means something and then I can show you are plain as day that Peyton threw for 56 percent, with a LOWER average yard per pass with more ints than TDs and tell me Peyton was more accurate as a rookie.

You judge him negatively based on his passing percentage. Now when you see that it is superior percentage for a rookie, I cannot compare him to guys who cant run?

I cannot even compare him to the number three highest running QB of all time, because he is not "that kind of QB?".

Dont give me BYU, base your comments on the NFL stats you dis Cam on. Rookie NFL numbers. By literally NO POSSIBLE MEASURE was Steve Young a better first year starter than Cam. And Steve Young was not a rookie. He was even worse then.

Steve Young was NOT more accurate as a rookie QB. Not close.

Truth be told if Cam "looked" like Steve Young, nobody would compare him to Vick.

feltdizz

12-19-2011, 09:50 AM

If you read my threads from the beginning I compared Newton to what I think are similar QB's...Michael Vick and Randall Cunningham. I wasnt the one who brought up other QB's. To me other type of QB's are irrelivant to my point (opinion).

I think just like Vick and Cunningham, when it's all said and done, Cam Newton will again be like them. QB's who could run but werent known for being great passers. I believe teams will make adjustments over time versus him and he will struggle with adversary. And his in ability to be an accurate passer will be more prevelant.

But that is just my opinion. We will see.

And as far as the "You know what Ben did and thought that others were similar", comment, that is an incorrect. The only mention or thought I had about Ben was to point out how some had said they would take Cam over Ben at the beginning of this season. To compare Ben to Cam to me would be ridiculous. Just like Comparing Bradshaw to Cam I also think is ridiculous.

By the way if at some point in time (and that would be far from just his rookie year), where Cam proves me wrong, I sure wont have a hard time admitting I was wrong.

A large portion of your argument was due to Cam's running skills and not being patient enough to throw his way down field.

You questioned his accuracy and used his 59% as proof he wasn't a great passer and "fell back to earth"

One guy said he would take Cam over Ben and I'm pretty sure he wasn't serious. I think Captain and Cam have already proved you wrong. The 59% you use to bash him is tops among ALL rookie QB's drafted #1 and he is about to break the rookie passing record held by Peyton Manning.

I've never seen anyone use record breaking stats as proof a guy doesn't have what it takes to be an accurate passer in the NFL.

Dee Dub

12-19-2011, 01:09 PM

The problem with your "logic" is that you judge Cam as a passer based on how well he "runs". That makes zero sense. You lump him in with other QBs who could run regardless of how their skills as a passers compare.

One, it's really not logic, it's more my opinion.

Now you say we cannot compare him AS A PASSER to guys who cannot run, because they are a "different kind" of QB?

QB's who arent running QB's focus primarily on what? Throwing the football. That is why the good to great ones improve over time.

You cannot wave around a 59 percent pass percentage like it means something and then I can show you are plain as day that Peyton threw for 56 percent, with a LOWER average yard per pass with more ints than TDs and tell me Peyton was more accurate as a rookie.

Peyton Manning in his worst throwing year is head and shoulders above Cam as a passer. That is why I dont think it is relevant to compare some one like him and his rookie year to that of Cam. Numbers are numbers. You cant tell me they are comparable just because of what their rookie numbers were.

You judge him negatively based on his passing percentage. Now when you see that it is superior percentage for a rookie, I cannot compare him to guys who cant run?

That is not the only reason why have judged him negatively. He has thrown 16 picks in 14 games.

Dee Dub

12-19-2011, 01:15 PM

Again, my thought is that Cam will follow the path of similar QB's like Vick and Cunningham. And in time not ever be considered a great passing QB.

And no one on this forum is going to change that thought I have. Only Cam Newton can change it.

snarky

12-19-2011, 01:21 PM

Peyton Manning in his worst throwing year is head and shoulders above Cam as a passer. That is why I dont think it is relevant to compare some one like him and his rookie year to that of Cam. Numbers are numbers. You cant tell me they are comparable just because of what their rookie numbers were.

...

That is not the only reason why have judged him negatively. He has thrown 16 picks in 14 games.

Peyton Manning threw 28 INTs in 16 games in his worst throwing year. (He also only completed 56.7% of his passes.

Dee Dub

12-19-2011, 02:06 PM

Peyton Manning in his worst throwing year is head and shoulders above Cam as a passer. That is why I dont think it is relevant to compare some one like him and his rookie year to that of Cam. Numbers are numbers. You cant tell me they are comparable just because of what their rookie numbers were.

...

That is not the only reason why have judged him negatively. He has thrown 16 picks in 14 games.

Peyton Manning threw 28 INTs in 16 games in his worst throwing year. (He also only completed 56.7% of his passes.

Again..I'm not looking at numbers when I look at Manning and Cam. I'm looking at reality. Manning is and will always be a better passer than Cam.

snarky

12-19-2011, 02:11 PM

[quote="Dee Dub":2z0pav6l]

Peyton Manning in his worst throwing year is head and shoulders above Cam as a passer. That is why I dont think it is relevant to compare some one like him and his rookie year to that of Cam. Numbers are numbers. You cant tell me they are comparable just because of what their rookie numbers were.

...

That is not the only reason why have judged him negatively. He has thrown 16 picks in 14 games.

Peyton Manning threw 28 INTs in 16 games in his worst throwing year. (He also only completed 56.7% of his passes.

Again..I'm not looking at numbers when I look at Manning and Cam. I'm looking at reality. Manning is and will always be a better passer than Cam.[/quote:2z0pav6l]

You sure were looking at numbers when you started this thread. What happened?

Dee Dub

12-19-2011, 02:31 PM

[quote="Dee Dub":1rnsn9hm]

Peyton Manning in his worst throwing year is head and shoulders above Cam as a passer. That is why I dont think it is relevant to compare some one like him and his rookie year to that of Cam. Numbers are numbers. You cant tell me they are comparable just because of what their rookie numbers were.

...

That is not the only reason why have judged him negatively. He has thrown 16 picks in 14 games.

Peyton Manning threw 28 INTs in 16 games in his worst throwing year. (He also only completed 56.7% of his passes.

Again..I'm not looking at numbers when I look at Manning and Cam. I'm looking at reality. Manning is and will always be a better passer than Cam.

You sure were looking at numbers when you started this thread. What happened?[/quote:1rnsn9hm]

Wow snarky..is it that hard to understand? I am looking at numbers and how his compare to similar QB's.

RuthlessBurgher

12-19-2011, 02:34 PM

[quote="Dee Dub":91u8a15s]

Peyton Manning in his worst throwing year is head and shoulders above Cam as a passer. That is why I dont think it is relevant to compare some one like him and his rookie year to that of Cam. Numbers are numbers. You cant tell me they are comparable just because of what their rookie numbers were.

...

That is not the only reason why have judged him negatively. He has thrown 16 picks in 14 games.

Peyton Manning threw 28 INTs in 16 games in his worst throwing year. (He also only completed 56.7% of his passes.

Again..I'm not looking at numbers when I look at Manning and Cam. I'm looking at reality. Manning is and will always be a better passer than Cam.[/quote:91u8a15s]

Seems like you are the only one on here not looking at reality. As several of us have shown again and again with multiple examples, reality is that rookie QB's tend to have low completion percentages and throw more interceptions than TD's. Many, many Super Bowl winning QB's, league MVP QB's, Hall of Fame QB's all had low completion percentages and threw more interceptions than TD's as rookies. Outside of Marino and Roethlisberger, this has been the case for seemingly every QB in the history of the NFL. But you don't expect Cam to improve as a passer because he has a low completion percentage and has thrown more interceptions than TD's. That makes no sense.

Why is Cam only compared with Cunningham and Vick? Those guys are thin and quick at 215 lbs., while Cam is built like a redwood tree at 240+ (his body type is more similar to Ben Roethlisberger and Josh Freeman than Cunningham or Vick).

snarky

12-19-2011, 02:51 PM

[quote=snarky][quote="Dee Dub":32hzvwvk]

Peyton Manning in his worst throwing year is head and shoulders above Cam as a passer. That is why I dont think it is relevant to compare some one like him and his rookie year to that of Cam. Numbers are numbers. You cant tell me they are comparable just because of what their rookie numbers were.

...

That is not the only reason why have judged him negatively. He has thrown 16 picks in 14 games.

Peyton Manning threw 28 INTs in 16 games in his worst throwing year. (He also only completed 56.7% of his passes.

Again..I'm not looking at numbers when I look at Manning and Cam. I'm looking at reality. Manning is and will always be a better passer than Cam.

You sure were looking at numbers when you started this thread. What happened?[/quote:32hzvwvk]

Wow snarky..is it that hard to understand? I am looking at numbers and how his compare to similar QB's.[/quote:32hzvwvk]

The only thing that Cam Newton has in common with Cunningham and Vick is his ability to run the ball. As a passer he appears to be miles better than them.

feltdizz

12-19-2011, 03:01 PM

The only thing Cam has in common with Vick and Cunningham is skin color... he isn't as fast as Vick, he isn't as lanky as Cunningham and he throws better then both.

snarky

12-19-2011, 03:03 PM

The only thing Cam has in common with Vick and Cunningham is skin color... he isn't as fast as Vick, he isn't as lanky as Cunningham and he throws better then both.

Are you telling me that Reggie Roby was a "running" punter and Mike Tomlin is a "running" head coach?

feltdizz

12-19-2011, 03:07 PM

Again..I'm not looking at numbers when I look at Manning and Cam. I'm looking at reality. Manning is and will always be a better passer than Cam.

What is reality? :lol: :lol: :lol:

feltdizz

12-19-2011, 03:09 PM

QB's who arent running QB's focus primarily on what? Throwing the football. That is why the good to great ones improve over time.

So Cam is breaking the rookie passing record without focusing on throwing the football? Wow.. imagine how good, oops, bad he will be if he focuses on throwing?

The only thing that will hinder Cam is losing his OC. I'm pretty sure that guy is going to get some big time offers this off season because he has done an amazing job with Cam.

Dee Dub

12-19-2011, 03:58 PM

Why is Cam only compared with Cunningham and Vick? Those guys are thin and quick at 215 lbs., while Cam is built like a redwood tree at 240+ (his body type is more similar to Ben Roethlisberger and Josh Freeman than Cunningham or Vick).

Because he is a similar type of QB as them....but not because they have the same body types :wink:

And you can compare him to anybody you want. That was just my comparison. And I think when it is over for Cam it will be a fair comparison.

Dee Dub

12-19-2011, 04:00 PM

QB's who arent running QB's focus primarily on what? Throwing the football. That is why the good to great ones improve over time.

So Cam is breaking the rookie passing record without focusing on throwing the football? Wow.. imagine how good, oops, bad he will be if he focuses on throwing?

The only thing that will hinder Cam is losing his OC. I'm pretty sure that guy is going to get some big time offers this off season because he has done an amazing job with Cam.

Uhhhhhh....my thread or knock on Newton had nothing to do with how many yards he can throw for. It's about is lack of accuracy.

snarky

12-19-2011, 04:05 PM

[quote="Dee Dub":2ccgrwcc]

QB's who arent running QB's focus primarily on what? Throwing the football. That is why the good to great ones improve over time.

So Cam is breaking the rookie passing record without focusing on throwing the football? Wow.. imagine how good, oops, bad he will be if he focuses on throwing?

The only thing that will hinder Cam is losing his OC. I'm pretty sure that guy is going to get some big time offers this off season because he has done an amazing job with Cam.

Uhhhhhh....my thread or knock on Newton had nothing to do with how many yards he can throw for. It's about is lack of accuracy.[/quote:2ccgrwcc]

Lack of accuracy compared to who and at what point in their career?

Dee Dub

12-19-2011, 04:07 PM

The only thing Cam has in common with Vick and Cunningham is skin color... he isn't as fast as Vick, he isn't as lanky as Cunningham and he throws better then both.

I am not so sure that is true. Right now I think Vick is the better passer. And if he isnt they are very close. But if you wanna base that on passing yards that doesnt really reflect who's a better passer. Vick's career numbers are very similar to Cam.

RuthlessBurgher

12-19-2011, 04:35 PM

Why is Cam only compared with Cunningham and Vick? Those guys are thin and quick at 215 lbs., while Cam is built like a redwood tree at 240+ (his body type is more similar to Ben Roethlisberger and Josh Freeman than Cunningham or Vick).

Because he is a similar type of QB as them....but not because they have the same body types :wink:

And you can compare him to anybody you want. That was just my comparison. And I think when it is over for Cam it will be a fair comparison.

We compared him to Terry Bradshaw and Steve Young and Peyton Manning and Ben Roethlisberger and so on and so on and so on, but you didn't feel any of those comparisons were valid. Only Cunningham and Vick.

Dee Dub

12-19-2011, 07:17 PM

Why is Cam only compared with Cunningham and Vick? Those guys are thin and quick at 215 lbs., while Cam is built like a redwood tree at 240+ (his body type is more similar to Ben Roethlisberger and Josh Freeman than Cunningham or Vick).

Because he is a similar type of QB as them....but not because they have the same body types :wink:

And you can compare him to anybody you want. That was just my comparison. And I think when it is over for Cam it will be a fair comparison.

We compared him to Terry Bradshaw and Steve Young and Peyton Manning and Ben Roethlisberger and so on and so on and so on, but you didn't feel any of those comparisons were valid. Only Cunningham and Vick.

No by all means....knock yourself out. If that is who you think he compares best too, then have at it. I personally think those arent fair comparisons. Manning, Bradshaw, and Steve Young I am sure didnt spend half their game planning each week working on designed run plays. That in itself I believe will continue to make Cam struggle with accuracy.

williar

12-19-2011, 08:20 PM

My question about this whole thread is the following: Why does anyone care if Cam Newton comes back to earth or takes off like a spaceship? I will say this the media over hypes all these top quarterbacks and it does put a sour taste in your mouth about the player, because he hasn't taken a bloody snap in the NFL and you'd think they're all HOFers based on the media. So, while Newton, may be great or not, I was tired of hearing about him, just like Andrew Luck this year.

Pappy

Well for me, believe it or not, I really dont care whether he comes back to earth or takes off. Since you were here on this site early in the season then you should know how Ben Roethlisberger was attacked and heavily criticized for his early struggles. Some went as far as saying they would rather have Cam Newton instead. And I am sure you can remember how many where praising Newton early on as if he were the next great one. Well the tides have changed. Ben is playing some of the best ball of his life, and Cam Newton has well....come back to earth a little.

I got a little tired of hearing it to Pap. :wink:

I thought this would be a good thread to remember and remind.

Ben > Cam.....and will always be. :tt2

If I recall correctly it was one poster trying to stir the pot and saying he'd rather take Cam over Ben. Don't take it personally, he (or she) was trying to get under your skin. He (she) knew darn well Ben is the better quarterback and will be for the foreseeable future, but enjoyed stirring the pot.
Pappy

Errrrr, Uhhhhh, Pap! That came from the heart, sir.

Captain Lemming

12-24-2011, 06:12 PM

Uhhhhhh....my thread or knock on Newton had nothing to do with how many yards he can throw for. It's about is lack of accuracy.

The No. 1 pick in the NFL draft broke Peyton Manning's rookie record for yards passing and set a franchise mark with a 91-yard touchdown toss to Brandon LaFell as the Carolina Panthers handed the Tampa Bay Buccaneers their ninth straight defeat, 48-16 on Saturday.

Newton threw for 171 yards and three touchdowns and scored on a remarkable 49-yard run up the middle in which he outraced smaller defensive backs to the end zone.

The Panthers (6-9) scored on eight of their first nine possessions and piled up 397 yards in three quarters against the league's 30th-ranked defense. Carolina coach Ron Rivera pulled Newton and the other key starters early in the fourth.

DeAngelo Williams scored on runs of 8 and 22 yards, his sixth and seventh TDs of the season, and Jonathan Stewart ran for 88 yards and caught an 11-yard touchdown pass from Newton.

Newton entered the game needing 18 yards passing to break Manning's record of 3,739 and did so with a 7-yard pass to LaFell on the first possession.

"It's tremendous, but if you ask the young man he'll tell you the most important thing is we won the game," Rivera said. "There's a lot of good things ahead for us."

Newton, however, was just getting started at that point.

On Carolina's third possession, he backpedaled into his own end zone and unleashed a strike to LaFell, who got a key downfield block from Steve Smith to spring him for a 91-yard score. That topped the franchise record of 89 yards set in the Panthers' expansion season of 1995 by Kerry Collins and Willie Green.

LaFell finished with a career-high 103 yards receiving.

Carolina's offensive line completely mauled a Bucs defense that was without starting defensive tackles Albert Haynesworth and Brian Price. The Panthers piled up a season-high 270 yards rushing and scored three times on the ground, giving them 25 for the season -- most in the league.

Newton scored eight touchdowns in two games against Tampa Bay -- four rushing and four passing -- as the Panthers racked up 79 points.

Just as they did on Dec. 4, the Panthers jumped all over the Bucs early.

Newton led the Panthers on a picture-perfect, 80-yard, nine-play touchdown drive to open the game, with Williams scoring on an 8-yard touchdown run.

LaGarrette Blount fumbled on the Bucs' first play from scrimmage and the Panthers converted that turnover into a field goal. Blount was benched for the rest of the first half and finished with just 11 yards rushing.

The Panthers led 20-10 at halftime but put the hammer down in the third quarter as Williams ran for a 22-yard touchdown and Newton threw an 11-yard scoring pass to Stewart on fourth-and-1 to put Carolina up 34-10.

Then came the play of the game as Newton faked a handoff to Stewart and took off through a huge hole on the right side of the line. Newton juked a defender before shifting into another gear and blowing through the Tampa Bay secondary for the longest touchdown run ever by a Panthers quarterback.

He added a touchdown toss to Jeremy Shockey to close out the scoring.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/recap?gameId=311224029

RuthlessBurgher

12-29-2011, 05:51 PM

From Peter King's MMQB column:

Cam Newton is on his way to the best rookie season ever. By any player.

Many of us were skeptical of Cam Newton's ability to transition to the pro game so quickly, and without a full offseason program. But he's done a fabulous job in all ways of adjusting to the NFL. His confidence is off the charts for a young player. His hatred of losing, as I've written about before, is surprising for such a young player; after a loss, he's nearly inconsolable, even by respected opponents. He's more accurate in a complicated offense than anyone had a right to expect. And though he clearly wants to establish himself as a strong pocket passer with awareness to see the whole field, he knows when to take off too. And the results have been strong since the Panthers, on Thanksgiving Day, stood 2-8. Carolina is 4-1 since then (thanks, Bucs), and here are Newton's numbers: eight touchdown passes, two picks, five rushing touchdowns, 60 percent passing.

He already owns the rookie record for passing yards (3,893), and, obviously, will be the first rookie to pass for 4,000 with 107 yards against the Saints next week. Newton passed Peyton Manning's record with his 478th throw Saturday; Manning threw 575 passes as a rookie in 1998. Newton's rushed for more touchdowns, 14, than any quarterback in any season ever. The NFL mark for rushing touchdowns by a quarterback is 43, by Steve Young ... and Newton's a third of the way there already.

Listen to these strong words from owner Jerry Richardson to me the other day: "As far as I'm concerned, he'll be the last quarterback we ever draft high in my lifetime. He is a very unusual young man, and I say that in a highly complimentary way. He does not complain. Ever. He's never in the trainers room. You watch him get hit out there and you think, 'He got to be hurting,' and then you see he's never with the trainers. The way he has adapted to our team and to the NFL has been tremendous. We couldn't be happier.''

GM Marty Hurney said before the draft that in order to compete in a quarterback-strong division, the Panthers had to take a quarterback and develop him quickly. He could never have imagined this. Who could? The most amazing thing is Newton having seven weeks of pro coaching before the real games began, and having a season like this one. Imagine when he has an offseason to work on the things he needs to improve. Which, from watching him, is not much.

Peyton Manning in his worst throwing year is head and shoulders above Cam as a passer. That is why I dont think it is relevant to compare some one like him and his rookie year to that of Cam. Numbers are numbers. You cant tell me they are comparable just because of what their rookie numbers were.

...

That is not the only reason why have judged him negatively. He has thrown 16 picks in 14 games.

Peyton Manning threw 28 INTs in 16 games in his worst throwing year. (He also only completed 56.7% of his passes.

Again..I'm not looking at numbers when I look at Manning and Cam. I'm looking at reality. Manning is and will always be a better passer than Cam.[/quote:2rxqjn60]
Peyton also was less accurate. than Cam as a college QB by any statistical metric. Peyton never threw for 66 percent in college like Can did. And Peyton was a three year starter versus Cams one. Can had one of the best statistical college seasons as a passer ever.

If you don't go by numbers why did you bring them up?

Oh 59 percent makes Can inaccurate, but Peytons 56 and worse int numbers can't be usedto compare?
At this stage of their respective careers Can is every bit the passer that Peyton was.

BradshawsHairdresser

12-30-2011, 10:16 AM

By any measure, Cam has had an amazing rookie season. Nobody knows where his career will go from here, but I would think a rational projection would have to be upward and onward.

feltdizz

12-30-2011, 02:49 PM

Kordell Stewart disagrees...

BradshawsHairdresser

12-30-2011, 08:43 PM

Kordell Stewart disagrees...

You tight with Korkie?

Wasn't he the one that was certain that the *'s would defeat the Steelers in their game here about 8 weeks ago?

Excuse me, but I don't put a lot of stock into Korkie's opinion. Sorry if that makes me a :Hater.
:lol:

Team P.R. staffs from time to time send out emails touting the accomplishments of their players. Few such emails raise more eyebrows than the one circulated today by the Panthers.

We all know by now that rookie quarterback Cam Newton is having a special season. The email from the Panthersí P.R. staff makes clear just how special it has been.

Newton already has set the all-time rookie record for passing yards, with 3,893 and counting. And he has surpassed Peyton Manningís 3,739 yards in 1998 with 83 fewer attempts. Thatís right, 83 fewer attempts.

Several weeks ago, Newton broke the all-time quarterback record for rushing touchdowns. He has 14.

Those 14 rushing touchdowns put him only one score behind a three-way tie for second place in all-time rookie rushing touchdowns. Mike Anderson, Clinton Portis, and Ickey Woods each scored 15. (Eric Dickerson holds the record, with 18.)

Combining the 14 rushing touchdowns with 20 passing touchdowns, Newton has shattered the all-time mark for total touchdowns accounted for by a rookie, surpassing the 27 from Charlie Conerly of the Giants in 1948.

So while some continue to believe that Bengals quarterback Andy Dalton should be named the offensive rookie of the year if his team qualifies for the postseason, Newtonís historic first season should make the decision a no-brainer.

And if thereís any doubt, the AP voters should ask themselves one simple question: Who would you rather have on your team, Newton or Dalton?

I think if you are ranking best seasons by a rookie qb Ben and newton have to be 1 and 2, and it's pretty close between them. Ben was obviously more efficient, but he was protected somewhat by play calling and a defense that could hold a lead. On the other hand newton was the cornerstone of the offense and his combined 4800 yards is just plain dirty.

Ben definitely delivered when called upon. And I think making the afccg tips it in bens favor. But I wouldn't fault someone for saying newton had a better rookie season. It's very close IMO.

feltdizz

01-06-2012, 02:41 PM

I think if you are ranking best seasons by a rookie qb Ben and newton have to be 1 and 2, and it's pretty close between them. Ben was obviously more efficient, but he was protected somewhat by play calling and a defense that could hold a lead. On the other hand newton was the cornerstone of the offense and his combined 4800 yards is just plain dirty.

Ben definitely delivered when called upon. And I think making the afccg tips it in bens favor. But I wouldn't fault someone for saying newton had a better rookie season. It's very close IMO.

I think Cam had the best rookie season by a QB EVER!!!

Ben came to a team that was always a QB away from a SB. Cam went to the worst team in football last year and shattered records.

Ben had the best rookie season ever as far as wins are concerned but I think what Cam did was insane.